DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 000953492-0025

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-08-14

000102262

Contested design: 000953492-0025

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must pay the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text(de)

1. Der Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung des eingetragenen Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmusters Nr. 000953492-0025 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

NBL Europe GmbH

Germany (DE)

Monzastr. 4a, 63225 Langen, Deutschland

Holder · RCD owner

Erwin Müller GmbH

Germany (DE)

Breslauer Str. 34-38, 49808 Lingen (Ems), Deutschland

Prior art cited (2)

Registered RCDD1

wall-mounted soap dish holder

RCD No. 000640636-0014 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2007-01-30

CatalogD2

wall-mounted soap dish holder from the applicant's Series 113 bathroom accessories

Article No. 11315A · NBL product catalog excerpts from 2006 · disclosed 2006-12-31

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4Article 5(1)(b)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying on its earlier Series 113 soap-dish disclosures and earlier RCD No. 000640636-0014.
  • The holder argued the evidence did not reliably prove prior public disclosure and that the catalogs, declarations, emails, and orders were undated, uncorroborated, or irrelevant to EU sector circles.
  • The Division accepted disclosure of D1 through its publication and D2 through the 2006 applicant catalog, but found the remaining exhibits insufficient to prove further prior disclosures.
  • Comparing D1 and D2 with the contested design, the Division found clear differences in translucency, proportions, rim treatment, and bowl shape, so the contested RCD remained new and had individual character.

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

23.02

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000109541

vs Guangzhou Qiyue Information Technology Co., Ltd

2020-12-16Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)238
000109481

vs Guangzhou Qiyue Information Technology Co., Ltd

2020-12-16Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)238
000109561

vs Guangzhou Qiyue Information Technology Co., Ltd

2020-12-16Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)238
000109521

vs Guangzhou Qiyue Information Technology Co., Ltd

2020-12-16Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)238
000109461

vs Guangzhou Qiyue Information Technology Co., Ltd

2020-12-16Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)238
000105159

vs Ningbo Ontime Imp.&Exp.Co.,Ltd

2019-12-12Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)238
000107040

vs Shenzhen Walikexun Information Technology Co., Ltd.

2019-11-06Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)238
000102499

vs Erwin Müller GmbH

2019-08-14Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)238