DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 004171247-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2018-12-04

000102060

Contested design: 004171247-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

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

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 004171247-0001 is declared invalid. The holder bears the applicants’ costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Anand Khubanivia PDF extraction

United States (US)

8 Adams Way, Towaco, New Jersey 07082, United States of America

Represented by

A.A. Thornton & Co.

Holder · RCD owner

Shenzhen Contemporary Trading Company

China (CN)

302, No. 4, Lane 3, Yongxiang Road, Wuhe Community, Bantian Street, Longgang District, Shenzhen City, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

Zhaoffice SPRL

Prior art cited (2)

Web disclosureAnnex 1.4

Finishing Touch Flawless hair remover

https://www.finishingtouchflawless.com · Internet Archive / finishingtouchflawless.com · disclosed 2017-07-03

Web disclosureAnnex 1.5

YouTube review screenshots of the Finishing Touch Flawless hair remover

www.youtube.com · YouTube · disclosed 2017-05-23

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicants argued that the contested hair remover design had been disclosed before 30/08/2017 and therefore lacked novelty and individual character.
  • The holder filed no observations and did not rebut the applicants’ evidence on prior disclosure or the merits.
  • The Division accepted prior disclosure from the archived product website and YouTube review material, but found the colour differences insufficient to create a different overall impression.
  • Novelty was rejected as a ground, but the design lacked individual character; the invalidity application was upheld and the RCD declared invalid.

Deciding panel

  • MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
  • MemberBirgit FILTENBORG
  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

28.03

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130164

vs Moritz Neugebauer

2026-05-22REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000129241

vs Yi Wing Global Limited

2026-05-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000132044

vs Xucan XU

2026-05-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000131244

vs Shenzhen Lumei E-commerce Co., Ltd.

2026-03-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000130964

vs Changde Yameixun Network Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-02-06REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000130541

vs Medintim SL

2025-12-23REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000128396

vs Koninklijke Philips N.V.

2025-12-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000128157

vs Koninklijke Philips N.V.

2025-12-10REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288