DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 000953492-0028

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-08-14

000102499

Contested design: 000953492-0028

CDRmedium-confidence extraction

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The application for a declaration of invalidity 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. 000953492-0028 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 (1)

Catalog⚠ rejected as evidence

wall-mounted tissue box holder from the applicant's 'SERIES 113' bathroom accessory series

Article No. 11373A · NBL 'SERIES 113' product catalog and asserted trade-fair displays

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character based on an earlier bathroom accessory design allegedly disclosed in its Series 113 catalogs and at trade fairs.
  • The holder argued the evidence did not prove disclosure because key materials were undated, untranslated, or inconclusive, and in any event the earlier design did not destroy novelty or individual character.
  • The Division held disclosure under Article 7 must be shown by concrete, objective evidence and found the catalog, fair, and witness materials insufficient individually and cumulatively.
  • Because prior disclosure of the earlier design was not proven, the invalidity grounds under Article 25(1)(b) in conjunction with Articles 4, 5 and 6 failed, so the application was rejected.

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
000102262

vs Erwin Müller GmbH

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