Invalidity · first instance · 2019-02-20
000102739
Contested design: 005224003-0001
Outcome
The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay the applicant’s fixed costs of EUR 750.
Show verbatim operative text
The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 005224003-0001 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
Alfonso Vega Navarro
Spain (ES)
Camino de Valderribas, 79, portal 2, 3º C, 28038 Madrid, Spain
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Zhilun Xuvia PDF extraction
China (CN)
no. 1710, Building no. 3, Ren He Jia Yuan, Kandun Street, Cixi City, Zhejiang Province, People’s Republic of China
Represented by
Prior art cited (10)
lighters
Community design registration No 003007129-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2016-03-02
lighter
Turkish design registration No 201508850-0001 · Turkey · disclosed 2017-01-24
lighter
Turkish design registration No 201306364-0002 · Turkey · disclosed 2013-11-01
lighter
Turkish design registration No 201501673-0002 · Turkey · disclosed 2015-05-01
lighter
Chinese design registration No 303162027 · China · disclosed 2015-04-08
lighter
Chinese design registration No 303109556 · China · disclosed 2015-02-18
lighter
Chinese design registration No 303109557 · China · disclosed 2015-02-18
lighter
Chinese design registration No 303808751 · China · disclosed 2016-08-17
lighter
Chinese design registration No 304008466 · China
views of a national design registration for a lighter
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, arguing the contested lighter had been disclosed earlier and citing multiple prior design registrations.
- ›The holder filed no observations in response to the invalidity application.
- ›The Division found earlier RCD No 003007129-0001 had been validly disclosed before the filing date under Article 7 CDR.
- ›Given the almost unlimited design freedom for lighters, the small differences in transparency and colour did not alter the same overall impression on the informed user.
- ›The application was upheld because the contested RCD lacked individual character, and the holder was ordered to pay costs.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000130847 vs Ying CAO | 2026-02-13 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 27 | 8 |
| 000125137 vs Shenzhen Olit Trading Co., Ltd. | 2025-12-02 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 27 | 8 |
| 000127919 vs Benxi Fenghe Lighter Co., Ltd | 2025-05-23 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 27 | 8 |
| 000124395 vs Xin Lu | 2025-02-27 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 27 | 8 |
| 000126756 vs SHENZHEN KAIWEILI DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY CO.,LTD | 2024-12-18 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 27 | 8 |
| 000126655 vs Feoba Tech Limited | 2024-12-09 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 27 | 8 |
| 000126656 vs Feoba Tech Limited | 2024-12-09 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 27 | 8 |
| 000126597 vs Feoba Tech Limited | 2024-12-04 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 27 | 8 |