DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 004697357-0005

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-04-01

000103939

Contested design: 004697357-0005

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay EUR 750 in costs.

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 004697357-0005 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

Duralex International

France (FR)

7, rue du Petit Bois, 45380 La Chapelle Saint Mesmin, France

Represented by

Cabinet @Mark

Holder · RCD owner

Ștefania-Lăcrămioara Bociuvia PDF extraction

Romania (RO)

Sec 1, Str. Făurei Nr. 5, Bl. C9, Sc. C, Ap. 82, Bucharest, Romania

Represented by

Claudia Monica Frisch

Prior art cited (5)

Other⚠ rejected as evidence

Technical drawing of Duralex 'Prisme' 33cl drinking glass

Duralex technical drawing · disclosed 1998-05-06

Catalog

Duralex 'Prisme' 33cl drinking glass

Duralex 1999 · Duralex catalogue · disclosed 1999-01-01

Catalog

Duralex 'Prisme' 33cl drinking glass

The glassware catalogue 2006 · Duralex catalogue · disclosed 2006-01-01

Catalog

Duralex 'Prisme' 33cl drinking glass

Les collections 2012 · Duralex catalogue · disclosed 2012-01-01

Catalog

Duralex 'Prisme' 33cl drinking glass

Duralex & you: collections 2015 · Duralex catalogue · disclosed 2015-01-01

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • Applicant argued the contested glass lacked novelty and individual character because its Prisme 33cl glass had been sold since 1987.
  • Holder filed no observations or evidence in response to the invalidity application.
  • The Division accepted the dated catalogues as proof of prior disclosure, while the technical drawing alone did not prove public disclosure.
  • The Division found the contested glass reproduced the prior design's overall shape and surface pattern and lacked individual character, so the RCD was invalidated.

Deciding panel

  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberBirgit FILTENBORG

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

07.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131632

vs DETECTALIA EUROPE, S.L.U.

2026-05-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000129741

vs 2W ORGANIC

2026-05-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131788

vs Liu Xiaoxia

2026-05-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131628

vs Shenzhen Changhe Technology Co., Ltd

2026-04-30REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131704

vs Shenzhen Changhe Technology Co., Ltd

2026-04-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131745

vs Huan Wang

2026-04-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000130924

vs SOHAI HOUSEWARES CO.,LTD.

2026-04-17REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131546

vs Foshan Changyuansheng Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-03-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078