Invalidity · first instance · 2019-01-31
000102779
Contested design: 003820950-0004
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 003820950-0004 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 Gmbh
Germany (DE)
Hochstr. 17 C505, 47228 Duisburg, Germany
Holder · RCD owner
Xin Lin
China (CN)
No. 13 Xiachi Alley, Cangshan Dist., Fuzhou, Fujian, People’s Republic of China
Represented by
Prior art cited (5)
Amazon.de listing for 'Samgu Unisex Adult Tier Onesie Pyjama Kostüm' penguin jumpsuit
ASIN B016MFAVKU · Amazon.de · disclosed 2015-10-13
Amazon.de listing for 'JT-Amigo Damen Herren Tier Kostüm Pyjama Jumpsuit' penguin jumpsuit
ASIN B07CN7MPSY · Amazon.de · disclosed 2016-01-08
Lightinthebox.com listing for 'Kigurumi Pajamas Penguin Onesie'
Lightinthebox.com · Lightinthebox.com · disclosed 2013-08-10
Amazon.it listing for 'Kugurumi Unisex Adulto Cosplay Halloween Costume' penguin jumpsuit
ASIN B0156FT7DO · Amazon.it · disclosed 2015-09-10
Customer reviews concerning 'Just Love Velour Adult Onesie Pajamas'
Amazon.com · Amazon.com · disclosed 2016-12-03
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued that the contested penguin jumpsuit design had been publicly disclosed online before filing and therefore lacked novelty and individual character.
- ›The holders filed no observations and did not rebut the applicant's evidence of prior disclosure or the claimed lack of novelty and individual character.
- ›The Division found the retail-portal evidence mutually corroborative and sufficient to prove prior disclosure of the penguin jumpsuit design under Article 7 CDR.
- ›It held that the contested RCD produced the same overall impression as the prior design, so the application was upheld and the RCD was declared invalid.
Deciding panel
- MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
- 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 |