DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003475656-0003

Invalidity · first instance · 2018-11-28

000000004

Contested design: 003475656-0003

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, RCD No 003475656-0003 is declared invalid, and the holder must bear 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 003475656-0003 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

MPOW Technology Co., Ltd.

Hong Kong (HK)

Room 603, 6/F, Hang Pont Commercial Building, 31 Tonkin Street, Cheung Sha Wan, KLN, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China

Represented by

MonYin Lin

Holder · RCD owner

Shenzhen Jinghe Technology Co., Ltdvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

RM201, BLDG A, No. 1, Qianwan Rd. 1, Qianhai Shengang Cooperation Area, Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province 518000, Shenzhen, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

Haoyue Xue

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosure

solar powered LED security light / outdoor wall lamp

ASIN B01LQB1FSC · Amazon.de and Amazon.co.uk · disclosed 2016-09-07

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying on Amazon UK and Germany listings and sales data for an earlier identical solar-powered LED lamp sold before the filing date.
  • The holder filed no observations and did not contest disclosure or the substantive invalidity grounds.
  • The Division accepted the Amazon extracts as solid evidence of public disclosure before 21/11/2016 and found the cited product formed valid prior art under Article 7 CDR.
  • It held that the differences on the back panel and unseen bottom/side views prevented a finding of identity, but they did not change the overall impression given the broad designer freedom for LED lamps.
  • The application was upheld because the contested RCD lacked individual character, and the holder was ordered to pay EUR 750 in costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
  • MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVA

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

26.04

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130945

vs Space Copenhagen Design ApS

2026-05-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131284

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131264

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131304

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131245

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131366

vs DANMAR TECH SL

2026-04-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131247

vs chao zhai

2026-04-02REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000129540

vs Ningbo Wilder Outdoor Products Co., Ltd.

2026-03-24REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268