Invalidity · first instance · 2019-07-09
000101440
Contested design: 001194039-0001
Outcome
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. 001194039-0001 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
Eglo Leuchten GmbHvia PDF extraction
Austria (AT)
Heiligkreuz 22, 6136 Pill, Österreich
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
KARE Design GmbH
Germany (DE)
Zeppelinstr. 16, 85748 Garching-Hochbrück, Deutschland
Represented by
Prior art cited (7)
Hängeleuchten
RCD No 001087191-0005 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2009-04-16
Leuchten
RCD No 000575584-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2006-10-03
Lampen
RCD No 001102354-0025 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2009-04-21
Lampen
RCD No 000958525-0009 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2008-07-09
Lampen
RCD No 000662176-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2007-02-27
lamp
FR20092003002S1 · analytics.patsnap.com · disclosed 2010-01-08
lighting series datasheet
Beat Range Linear 1 · Beat Range Linear 1 datasheet
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued the contested hanging-lamp design lacked novelty and individual character in light of earlier lamp designs and prior disclosures.
- ›The holder maintained the design was new and had individual character, emphasizing differences from the cited designs and only average design freedom for lamps.
- ›The Division accepted disclosure of D1 to D5, but rejected D6 for illegible images and D7 for lack of proof that the design was publicly disclosed before the filing date.
- ›Comparing each earlier design individually, the Division found clear differences in structure, number, arrangement, and appearance of the lampshades, so the contested design remained new and had individual character.
Deciding panel
- MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
- MemberIngeborg MENDIETA VETTER
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deGerman | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Locarno classes
Similar decisions
Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.
| Case | Date | Outcome | Shared grounds | Locarno | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000106699 vs Shenzhen Juku Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd. | 2020-05-19 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 8 |
| 000104419 vs Lukas Staffen | 2019-11-04 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 8 |
| 000102399 vs INTAV S.R.L. | 2019-08-09 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 8 |
| 000104899 vs Daxtor ApS | 2019-05-22 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 8 |
| 000103059 vs ZHEJIANG CHINA-BEST IMPORT & EXPORT CO.,LTD | 2019-05-20 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 8 |
| 000102099 vs LIQUIDLEDS LIGHTING CORP | 2019-03-08 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 8 |
| 000011221 vs HANGZHOU CHENGYUE ELECTRON& ELECTRIC CO.., LTD. | 2019-02-27 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 8 |
| 000011220 vs HANGZHOU CHENGYUE ELECTRON& ELECTRIC CO.., LTD. | 2019-02-27 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 8 |