DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002457341-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2018-11-14

000010628

Contested design: 002457341-0001

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 002457341-0001 is rejected. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

4-Shisha GmbH

Germany (DE)

Im Hesselbruch 2, 45356 Essen, Germany

Holder · RCD owner

nextro GmbH

Austria (AT)

Bahnhof-Umgebung 17a, 6170 Zirl, Austria

Prior art cited (3)

Web disclosureD1⚠ rejected as evidence

hookah allegedly published on Facebook by a third party

Facebook · disclosed 2013-12-08

Prior useD2⚠ rejected as evidence

AK47 hookah allegedly exhibited at the Tobacco Plus Convention in Las Vegas and shown in Facebook posts

Tobacco Plus Convention, Las Vegas / Facebook · disclosed 2014-01-30

OtherD3⚠ rejected as evidence

Kalashnikov rifle (AK-47) relied on through Wikipedia, YouTube, and press extracts

Wikipedia / YouTube / press article

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5Article 6Article 7

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying on Facebook images, alleged trade-fair exhibition evidence, and later AK-47 materials as prior disclosures.
  • The holder argued the Facebook materials were unreliable, the applicant had not proved any relevant prior disclosure, and the contested hookah created a different overall impression in any event.
  • The Division held that the applicant's Facebook screenshots, private photographs, travel documents, and related materials did not provide solid, objective proof of public disclosure under Article 7 CDR.
  • Because disclosure of the invoked prior designs was not proven, the Division did not assess novelty or individual character further and rejected the application.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES
  • MemberBirgit FILTENBORG

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

27.02

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000010747

vs nextro GmbH

2018-12-19Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)278
000010795

vs posh global GmbH

2018-10-08Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)278
000111081

vs MatMind S.r.l.

2021-04-19Art 25(1)(b)277
000008394

vs MatMind S.r.l.

2018-11-22Invalidity application rejected276
000130847

vs Ying CAO

2026-02-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)275
000125137

vs Shenzhen Olit Trading Co., Ltd.

2025-12-02REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)275
000127919

vs Benxi Fenghe Lighter Co., Ltd

2025-05-23REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)275
000124395

vs Xin Lu

2025-02-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)275