DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 004495281-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-03-25

000011063

Contested design: 004495281-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

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

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 004495281-0001 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the applicant’s costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Allergan Holdings France SAS

France (FR)

12, Place de la Defense, 92400 Courbevoie, France

Holder · RCD owner

JUVEDERM Elite Clinics S.A.R.L.via PDF extraction

LB

Corniche Mazraa — Lebanon Gulf bank — 4th Floor, Beirut, Lebanon

Represented by

Krasimira Kadieva

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCD

logos, graphic symbols, surface patterns, ornamentation

RCD No 002689687-0001 · Office designs bulletin · disclosed 2015-05-06

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that the contested logo design lacked novelty and individual character over the holder's earlier RCD No 002689687-0001 and also relied on other trademark-based grounds.
  • The holder argued the informed user was highly attentive, designer freedom was limited, and the added 'BEAUTY SALONS' rectangle, wording and contrast created a different overall impression; it also requested a stay.
  • The Division refused to stay the case, found the earlier RCD had been disclosed by publication in the Office bulletin before the contested filing date, and treated logo designers as enjoying broad freedom.
  • It held that the ellipse and 'JUVEDERM' element dominated both designs and that the added rectangular tagline was secondary, so the contested RCD lacked individual character and had to be invalidated.

Deciding panel

  • MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI-ALOISI
  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberBirgit FILTENBORG

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

32.00

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000011068

vs DERMAVITA COMPANY ltd

2019-03-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a), Art 25(1)(e)3212
000011084

vs DERMAVITA COMPANY ltd

2019-03-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a), Art 25(1)(e)3212
000011081

vs DERMAVITA COMPANY ltd

2019-03-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a), Art 25(1)(e)3212
000011077

vs DERMAVITA COMPANY ltd

2019-03-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a), Art 25(1)(e)3212
000011067

vs DERMAVITA COMPANY ltd

2019-03-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a), Art 25(1)(e)3212
000011072

vs DERMAVITA COMPANY ltd

2019-03-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a), Art 25(1)(e)3212
000011075

vs DERMAVITA COMPANY ltd

2019-03-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a), Art 25(1)(e)3212
000011080

vs DERMAVITA COMPANY ltd

2019-03-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a), Art 25(1)(e)3212