DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003065887-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-03-19

000101599

Contested design: 003065887-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

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 0030658870001 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

Sigmatron Eoodvia PDF extraction

Bulgaria (BG)

Edison str. No 35, 1111 Sofia, Bulgaria

Represented by

Atanas Kostov

Holder · RCD owner

T&D Control Systemsvia PDF extraction

Bulgaria (BG)

Primorski Region, residential complex Izgrev No 865, 9000 Varna, Bulgaria

Represented by

Plamen Priparzhenski

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCDAnnex 4

channel annunciator 'LSB6' / signalling devices with emergency lamp, illuminated signalling device, signalling apparatus, signal lights

RCD No 002747527-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2015-08-21

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character over its earlier RCD for the LSB6 channel annunciator.
  • The holder relied on Bulgarian and EUIPO decisions, argued the designs differed in graphics, colours, and side and rear features, and claimed limited design freedom.
  • The Division found the earlier RCD had been disclosed, but the differences were not immaterial, so the novelty ground failed.
  • It held the shared six-section front-panel layout dominated the overall impression, the side and rear differences mattered less in normal use, and the contested design lacked individual character.
  • The application was upheld, the contested RCD was declared invalid, and costs were awarded against the holder.

Deciding panel

  • MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI-ALOISI
  • MemberBirgit FILTENBORG
  • MemberGaile SAKALAITE

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

10.06

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130161

vs ALBOR BOGDAN NIEDBAŁA

2026-01-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000130127

vs ALBOR BOGDAN NIEDBAŁA

2026-01-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000127515

vs Changzhou Fengxue Network Technology Co., Ltd.

2025-06-10REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
0001274582025-04-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000123375

vs Gongjue Brand management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd.

2025-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000123394

vs Gongjue Brand management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd.

2025-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000123374

vs Gongjue Brand management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd.

2025-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000123355

vs Gongjue Brand management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd.

2025-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108