DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 000953492-0027

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-08-14

000102539

Contested design: 000953492-0027

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The application for a declaration of invalidity is rejected; 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. 000953492-0027 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

Earlier wall-mounted soap basket from the applicant's 'Serie 113' bathroom accessories line.

SERIES 113 / Artikelnr. 11360B · NBL product catalog 'SERIES 113' and alleged trade-fair displays (ISH 2007; International Building & Construction Trade Fair 2008)

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying on an earlier soap basket from its 'Serie 113' allegedly disclosed in catalogs, at trade fairs, and through sales documents.
  • The holder argued that the evidence did not prove any prior public disclosure, challenged the probative value of the affidavits and undated catalogs, and disputed any effect on novelty or individual character.
  • The Division held that disclosure under Article 7 required concrete, objective proof and found the dated 2008 catalog too late, the untranslated website extract unusable, and the remaining catalogs, fair materials, affidavits, and invoices insufficient to establish prior public availability.
  • Because no earlier design was proven to have been made available to the public before the filing date, the invalidity application was rejected and costs were awarded against the applicant.

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