Invalidity · first instance · 2019-08-13
000104339
Contested design: 004371888-0002
Outcome
The invalidity application is upheld, the contested registered Community design is declared invalid, and the holder must bear the applicant's costs fixed at EUR 750.
Show verbatim operative text(it)
La domanda di dichiarazione di nullità è accolta. Il disegno/modello comunitario registrato n. 0043718880002 è dichiarato nullo. La titolare sopporta l’onere delle spese sostenute dalla richiedente, fissate a 750 EUR.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
ESG Edelmetall-Service GmbH & Co. KG
Germany (DE)
Gewerbering 29b, 76287 Rheinstetten, Germania
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Euronummus S.p.A.via PDF extraction
Italy (IT)
Viale Luigi Majno 10, 20129 Milano, Italia
Represented by
Viviana Carini
Prior art cited (4)
rectangular bullion bar subdivided into 2 x 5 miniature bars
Goldtafel-CombiBar; product code 10202176 · edelmetall-handel.de and sales invoices · disclosed 2014-04-29
rectangular bullion bar subdivided into 2 x 5 miniature bars
Cook Islands; product code 02012120 · edelmetall-handel.de and sales invoices · disclosed 2012-05-17
rectangular bullion bar subdivided into 2 x 5 miniature bars
Silbertafel; product code 10202954 · edelmetall-handel.de and sales invoices · disclosed 2016-05-11
bullion bar shown on a product webpage
Silbertafel Valcambi; product code 10202834 · edelmetall-handel.de
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity under Article 25(1)(b) CDR, arguing the contested bullion-bar design lacked novelty and individual character over earlier designs D1 to D4 marketed before filing.
- ›The holder argued the invoices were untranslated and insufficiently linked to the products, and said the contested square bar created a different overall impression from the earlier rectangular bars.
- ›The Division accepted the webpages, invoices, and sworn statement as sufficient proof of prior disclosure for D1 to D3 and compared D1 with the contested design for reasons of procedural economy.
- ›Novelty was not established, but the shared 2 x 5 segmented layout dominated the informed user's overall impression, so the design lacked individual character and was declared invalid.
Deciding panel
- MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI-ALOISI
- MemberBirgit FILTENBORG
- MemberPierluigi M. VILLANI
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| itItalian | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000130246 vs Giuliana FERRAROTTI | 2026-05-15 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 11 | 8 |
| 000131904 vs Lang Huang | 2026-04-20 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 11 | 8 |
| 000126958 vs Anna Krystyniak | 2025-10-15 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 11 | 8 |
| 000126957 vs Anna Krystyniak | 2025-10-15 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 11 | 8 |
| 000126956 vs Anna Krystyniak | 2025-10-15 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 11 | 8 |
| 000126975 vs Anna Krystyniak | 2025-10-15 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 11 | 8 |
| 000127536 vs Shuxun Dai | 2025-03-28 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 11 | 8 |
| 000124515 vs Heinrich Braun | 2025-03-17 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 11 | 8 |