DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 005646502-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-10-11

000105701

Contested design: 005646502-0002

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 005646502-0002 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

S.C. Minet Conf S.R.L.via PDF extraction

Romania (RO)

Str. Catanestilor nr. 49A, Ramnicu Valcea, jud.Valcea, Romania

Holder · RCD owner

Ramtex Production S.R.L.via PDF extraction

Romania (RO)

Strada Doctor Hecman nr 9, Ramnicu Valcea, Romania

Represented by

Bogdan Alecu

Prior art cited (3)

Web disclosure

fabric ornamentation shown on the applicant website

http://www.minetconf.ro · Wayback Machine / minetconf.ro · disclosed 2014-09-13

Catalog

applicant catalogue showing the same fabric ornamentation

applicant catalogue

Web disclosure

product catalogue publication showing the same fabric ornamentation

www.issuu.com · Issuu · disclosed 2014-10-22

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that its fabric ornamentation had been publicly disclosed before the contested RCD filing date through its catalogue, Issuu publication, website archive, and related manufacturing documents.
  • The holder filed no observations and did not dispute disclosure or the claimed lack of novelty and individual character.
  • The Division found the website archive, catalogue, and Issuu materials, read together, provided solid and objective proof of prior public disclosure under Article 7 CDR.
  • The contested design reproduced the same twisted rope-like rectangular ornamentation as the earlier design, so it lacked novelty and the application was upheld.

Deciding panel

  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
  • MemberBirgit FILTENBORG

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

05.05

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131630

vs Shenghui Wei

2026-04-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)058
000131631

vs Shenzhen Shuangzhi E-commerce Co., Ltd.

2026-04-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)058
000121039

vs FOLPOL ROBERT BARCZYK, JACEK CYGAN

2024-03-01REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)058
000122054

vs Scott Nettelton

2023-11-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)058
000105700

vs RAMTEX PRODUCTION

2019-10-14REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)058
000124336

vs Radosław Pryba

2026-05-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)5
000132204

vs Baofeng LIU

2026-05-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)5
000132185

vs Baofeng LIU

2026-05-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)5