DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 001733239-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-06-05

000010606

Contested design: 001733239-0001

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. 001733239-0001 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

Switchlab Inc.via PDF extraction

Taiwan (TW)

8F., No. 66, Zhongzheng Rd., Xinzhuang Dist. New Taipei City 24243, Republic of China (Taiwan)

Holder · RCD owner

WAGO Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH

Germany (DE)

Patentabteilung / Fr. Burt, Hansastr. 27, 32423 Minden, Deutschland

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCD⚠ rejected as evidence

earlier RCD for a Leiterplattenklemme cited against individual character

GGM Nr. 001691577-0001 · Blatt für Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmuster · disclosed 2010-04-14

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4Article 4(2)Article 6Article 7(2)

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued the contested RCD for an SMD printed-circuit-board terminal was a hidden component of a complex product and lacked individual character over earlier RCD No. 001691577-0001.
  • The holder replied that the terminal block was a standard component that can remain visible in normal use, Article 4(2) did not apply, and the earlier RCD was excluded by the Article 7(2) grace period.
  • The Invalidity Division found the applicant had not proved the component would be invisible in normal use and accepted evidence showing visible installations, so the Article 4(2) restriction did not defeat protection.
  • It also held the earlier RCD was the holder's own earlier design and, although published before filing, had to be disregarded under Article 7(2), so the invalidity grounds under Article 25(1)(b) were not established.
  • The application was therefore rejected and the applicant was ordered to pay the holder's costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberIvanka IVANOVA

Decision files

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

Locarno classes

13.03

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000104219

vs HYTRONIK INTERNATIONAL LTD

2019-08-13Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)138
000104719

vs FIBRAIN Spółka Z Ograniczoną Odpowiedzialnością

2019-07-30Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)138
000010607

vs WAGO Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH

2019-06-05Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)138
000010608

vs WAGO Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH

2019-06-05Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)138
000010609

vs WAGO Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH

2019-06-05Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)138
000124975

vs WAGO Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH

2025-08-01Art 25(1)(b)137
000124937

vs WAGO Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH

2025-07-14Art 25(1)(b)137
000126960

vs Qiu Chen

2025-05-21Art 25(1)(b)137