DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 001457113-0075

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-05-28

000102040

Contested design: 001457113-0075

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application 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. 0014571130075 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

40 2011 006754-0004 · DPMA Designblatt · disclosed 2012-03-16

National designD2

shoe

40 2011 006754-0005 · DPMA Designblatt · disclosed 2012-03-16

National designD3

shoe

40 2012 003211-0004 · DPMA Designblatt · disclosed 2012-09-28

Registered RCDD4

shoe

001340749-0004 · Community Designs Bulletin

Catalog⚠ rejected as evidence

catalog extract showing the Tanaro model

Nachorderkatalog Herbst/Winter 2012, Modell Tanaro · Nachorderkatalog Herbst/Winter 2012

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 German designs D1 to D3, RCD D4, and a 2012 catalog extract.
  • The holder argued the contested shoe design was new and had individual character because the cited designs did not match it or create the same overall impression.
  • The Division accepted disclosure of D1 to D4 from official register extracts but found the Herbst/Winter 2012 catalog extract insufficiently proven as a public disclosure.
  • Differences in seam layout, side details, and the saw-tooth outsole meant no cited design was identical and the contested design produced a different overall impression.
  • The invalidity grounds under Article 25(1)(b) CDR failed, so the application was rejected and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
  • MemberIvanka IVANOVA

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 rejected026
000104179

vs Alanui S.r.l.

2020-01-21Invalidity application rejected026
000104739

vs Naketano GmbH

2019-12-19Invalidity application rejected026
000105199

vs Angels GmbH

2019-11-29Invalidity application rejected026
000011208

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

2019-08-14Invalidity application rejected026
000011239

vs Lisa Marie Fernandez, LLC

2019-07-15Invalidity application rejected026
000011236

vs Lisa Marie Fernandez, LLC

2019-07-15Invalidity application rejected026
000011237

vs Lisa Marie Fernandez, LLC

2019-07-15Invalidity application rejected026