DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003526714-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2018-11-26

000000041

Contested design: 003526714-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay the applicant's costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 0035267140001 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

Out of the blue KG

Germany (DE)

Beim neuen Damm 28, 28865 Lilienthal, Germany

Holder · RCD owner

J JO Market LLC

United States (US)

4606 Hathaway Dr., Medford, Oregon 97504, United States of America

Represented by

Fox Williams LLP

Prior art cited (3)

Web disclosureD1

the Cougar Town Guzzle Buddy wine glass

YouTube video uploaded on 04/03/2014 · YouTube · disclosed 2014-03-04

PatentD2

wine glass design

US patent No 6,155,315 · US patent document · disclosed 2000-12-05

PatentD3

wine glass design

US patent application No 2013/0020333 A1 · US patent application document · disclosed 2013-01-24

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4Article 5Article 6(1)Article 7Article 8(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character and argued that the stem features were dictated solely by technical function.
  • The applicant relied on the Cougar Town Guzzle Buddy disclosure and two US patent documents; the holder filed no observations in reply.
  • The Division found the applicant had not proved the stem should be excluded under Article 8(1), and rejected the novelty ground because differences were not immaterial.
  • Comparing the contested design with D1, the Division held the overall impression on the informed user was the same despite minor stem and bowl differences.
  • The application was upheld under Article 25(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 6, and the RCD was declared invalid with costs against the holder.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
  • MemberBirgit FILTENBORG

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

07.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131632

vs DETECTALIA EUROPE, S.L.U.

2026-05-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000129741

vs 2W ORGANIC

2026-05-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131788

vs Liu Xiaoxia

2026-05-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131628

vs Shenzhen Changhe Technology Co., Ltd

2026-04-30REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131704

vs Shenzhen Changhe Technology Co., Ltd

2026-04-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131745

vs Huan Wang

2026-04-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000130924

vs SOHAI HOUSEWARES CO.,LTD.

2026-04-17REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131546

vs Foshan Changyuansheng Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-03-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078