DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002526673-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-08-12

000105560

Contested design: 002526673-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay the applicant’s fixed costs of EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 002526673-0001 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

Anna Maria Dickhöfer

Germany (DE)

Waagenstrasse 51B, 40229 Düsseldorf, Germany

Holder · RCD owner

Ningbo Ehome Electronic Co, Ltdvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

Suite 1603, Shiji Jinmao Bldg., 158, Baizhang Rd., Ningbo 315040, People’s Republic of China

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCD

Steinel brand wall-mounted motion sensor

RCD No 002473843-0002 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2014-06-03

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of individual character, relying on an earlier Steinel motion sensor published as RCD No 002473843-0002 before the filing date.
  • The applicant argued the compared wall-mounted sensor designs shared the same core stand, panoramic head and front sensor arrangement, differing essentially only in colours.
  • The holder filed no observations in response to the invalidity application.
  • The Invalidity Division found the earlier RCD was validly disclosed, the designer retained fairly high freedom, and the contested design reproduced the same overall impression on the informed user.
  • The application was upheld, the contested RCD was declared invalid for lack of individual character, and costs were awarded against the holder.

Deciding panel

  • MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI-ALOISI
  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

10.05

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130161

vs ALBOR BOGDAN NIEDBAŁA

2026-01-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000130127

vs ALBOR BOGDAN NIEDBAŁA

2026-01-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000127515

vs Changzhou Fengxue Network Technology Co., Ltd.

2025-06-10REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
0001274582025-04-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000123375

vs Gongjue Brand management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd.

2025-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000123394

vs Gongjue Brand management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd.

2025-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000123374

vs Gongjue Brand management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd.

2025-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000123355

vs Gongjue Brand management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd.

2025-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108