DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 001457113-0405

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-05-21

000102059

Contested design: 001457113-0405

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The application for a declaration of invalidity is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text(de)

1. Der Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung des eingetragenen Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmusters Nr. 0014571130405 wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten der Inhaberin, die auf 400 EUR festgesetzt werden.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

LEGERO Schuhfabrik Gesellschaft mbH

Austria (AT)

Marburgerstr. 10, 8042 Graz, Österreich

Holder · RCD owner

Rieker Schuh AG

Switzerland (CH)

Stockwiesenstr. 1., 8240 Thayngen, Schweiz

Prior art cited (5)

National designD1

shoe

German design No. 40 2011 006754-0004 · DPMA Design Register · disclosed 2012-03-16

National designD2

shoe

German design No. 40 2011 006754-0005 · DPMA Design Register · disclosed 2012-03-16

National designD3

shoe

German design No. 40 2012 003211-0004 · DPMA Design Register · disclosed 2012-09-28

Registered RCDD4

shoe

RCD No. 001340749-0004 · Community Designs Bulletin

Catalog⚠ rejected as evidence

extracts from the Autumn/Winter 2012 reorder catalog showing model Tanaro

Nachorderkatalog Herbst/Winter 2012

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • Applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character based on earlier German designs D1 to D3 and earlier RCD D4 for shoes.
  • Holder argued the contested design was new and had individual character because it was neither identical to nor created the same overall impression as the earlier designs.
  • The Division accepted D1 to D4 as disclosed prior art but rejected the Autumn/Winter 2012 catalog extract as insufficient evidence of disclosure because its circulation was not shown.
  • The Division found the zipper, decorative perforation pattern, and saw-tooth sole made the contested shoe design neither identical to nor lacking individual character; the invalidity application was rejected.

Deciding panel

  • MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
deGermanoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

02.04

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000106199

vs CALZATURIFICIO MERLYN SHOES SRLS

2020-02-18Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)028
000104179

vs Alanui S.r.l.

2020-01-21Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)028
000105199

vs Angels GmbH

2019-11-29Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)028
000011208

vs VAPESOL-FÁBRICA DE COMPONENTES PARA CALÇADO, UNIPESSOAL, LDA

2019-08-14Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)028
000011237

vs Lisa Marie Fernandez, LLC

2019-07-15Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)028
000011238

vs Lisa Marie Fernandez, LLC

2019-07-15Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)028
000011239

vs Lisa Marie Fernandez, LLC

2019-07-15Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)028
000011236

vs Lisa Marie Fernandez, LLC

2019-07-15Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)028