Invalidity · first instance · 2018-08-07
000011051
Contested design: 003466374-0001
Outcome
The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay EUR 750 in costs.
Show verbatim operative text
The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 003466374-0001 is declared invalid. The holder bears the applicant’s costs, fixed at EUR 750.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Balever (HK) Technology Co. Ltd
China (CN)
1st Floor, A6 Building Yinlong Industry Base, Longdong Community, Longgang District, Shenzhen 518115, People’s Republic of China
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Weidu Xie
China (CN)
18E, Bldg. 8, Mingzhu Court, Longzhu Garden, Shenhui Rd., Longgang Dist., Shenzhen, Guangdong, People’s Republic of China
Represented by
Prior art cited (8)
Chinese design patent application for an infrared camera
Application No 2016302099721; CN 303871220 · China Patent Examination Information Inquiry database · disclosed 2016-09-28
camera
www.balever.com · www.balever.com
camera
www.balever.com · www.balever.com
email correspondence with customer including pictures of a camera design
email correspondence · disclosed 2016-07-12
email correspondence with customer including pictures of a plastic mould for a camera
email correspondence · disclosed 2016-09-01
camera
www.amazon.de · www.amazon.de · disclosed 2016-04-08
camera
www.amazon.de · www.amazon.de · disclosed 2016-06-01
camera
www.amazon.de · www.amazon.de · disclosed 2016-11-12
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character based on earlier camera designs, especially a Chinese design patent publication from 28 September 2016.
- ›The holder filed no observations or evidence in reply and did not contest disclosure, grace period, novelty, or individual character.
- ›The Division accepted the Chinese design publication as a relevant prior disclosure under Article 7 CDR and found the contested design remained novel because the differences were not immaterial.
- ›Despite those differences, the Division found the overall shape, hole layout, and surface decoration created the same overall impression on the informed user, so the design lacked individual character.
- ›The invalidity application was upheld, the RCD was declared invalid, and costs of EUR 750 were awarded against the holder.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVA
- MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
- MemberIngeborg MENDIETA VETTER
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Locarno classes
Similar decisions
Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.
| Case | Date | Outcome | Shared grounds | Locarno | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000129117 vs QINGWEI LIU | 2026-03-17 | REUD invalidated | — | 16 | 6 |
| 000130544 vs ShangHai Jheyewear Co.,Ltd | 2026-03-06 | REUD invalidated | — | 16 | 6 |
| 000130342 vs AFFARGO LTD | 2026-02-04 | REUD invalidated | — | 16 | 6 |
| 000125536 vs SHENZHEN AIXIANGPAI E-BUSSINESS CO., LTD | 2025-02-07 | REUD invalidated | — | 16 | 6 |
| 000124135 vs Paweł Kośmider | 2024-05-30 | REUD invalidated | — | 16 | 6 |
| 000124085 vs Paweł Kośmider | 2024-05-30 | REUD invalidated | — | 16 | 6 |
| 000120389 vs Wenzhou Shengchu Trading Co., Ltd. | 2023-06-05 | REUD invalidated | — | 16 | 6 |
| 000119600 vs Shenzhen Amtang Technology Co., Ltd. | 2023-04-05 | REUD invalidated | — | 16 | 6 |