Invalidity · first instance · 2018-11-29
000102760
Contested design: 001456347-0010
Outcome
The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holders must pay the applicant's costs fixed at EUR 350.
Show verbatim operative text
The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 001456347-0010 is declared invalid. The holders bear the applicant’s costs, fixed at EUR 350.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €350
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Rainbow Unicorn GmbHvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
Hochstr. 17 C505, 47228 Duisburg, Germany
Holder · RCD owner
Chaobin Yuvia PDF extraction
China (CN)
No. 36 East Avenue, Gulou Dist., Fuzhou, Fujian 350013, People’s Republic of China
Represented by
Prior art cited (5)
Abyed 'Kostüm Jumpsuit Onesie Tier Fasching Karneval Halloween kostüm Erwachsene Unisex Cosplay Schlafanzug' purple dragon costume
Amazon.de · Amazon.de · disclosed 2016-10-18
Abyed 'Adulte Unisexe Anime Animal Costume Cosplay Combinaison Pyjama Outfit Nuit Vetements Onesie Fleece Halloween Costume Soiree de Deguisements' costume
Amazon.fr · Amazon.fr · disclosed 2016-10-18
'Kigurumi Pajamas Dinosaur/Dragon Onesie Pajamas Costume Coral fleece Purple Cosplay For Adults Animal Sleepwear Cartoon Halloween'
Lightinthebox.com · Lightinthebox.com · disclosed 2014-05-24
'Kigurumi Pajamas Dinosaur/Dragon Onesie Pajamas Costume Polar Fleece Purple Cosplay For Adults Animal Sleepwear Cartoon Halloween'
Lightinthebox.com · Lightinthebox.com · disclosed 2014-05-24
reviews for 'Kigurumi Animal Pajamas Costume Onesie Adult/Kid SLOTH-royal-dragon'
Etsy.com · Etsy.com · disclosed 2013-07-07
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying on earlier online disclosures of similar dragon costume onesies from 2013 to 2016.
- ›The holders filed no observations and did not rebut disclosure, novelty, or individual-character arguments.
- ›The Division accepted the web evidence as prior disclosure under Article 7, but found the color differences prevented identity for novelty purposes under Article 5.
- ›It held the contested design created the same overall impression as the prior design because only minor color and wing-tip differences distinguished it despite broad design freedom.
- ›The application was upheld, the RCD was declared invalid for lack of individual character, and the holders were ordered to pay EUR 350 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
- MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
- MemberBirgit FILTENBORG
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000132104 vs Shenzhen Damai Network Technology Co., Ltd. | 2026-05-21 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000127579 vs VICTORIA CARLOTA TERCEÑO JIMENEZ | 2026-04-15 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000131324 vs Song Li | 2026-03-11 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130815 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130769 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130811 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130812 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130814 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |