DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003763820-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-11-04

000104419

Contested design: 003763820-0002

CDR

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. 0037638200002 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

LC-Light GmbH

Germany (DE)

Franzstr. 25, Gladbeck, Deutschland

Holder · RCD owner

Lukas Staffen

Germany (DE)

Hauptstr. 42, 56253 Treis-Karden, Deutschland

Represented by

Jan Heidicker

Prior art cited (2)

International designD1

LED lamp / lighting element

D071791-0004 · International Design Bulletin · disclosed 2009-05-26

International designD2

LED lamp / lighting element

DM-072644-0006 · International Design Bulletin · disclosed 2009-11-26

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 8(1)Article 6(1)Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of individual character and because the design's features were allegedly dictated solely by technical function.
  • The holder argued the contested design was not purely functional and created a different overall impression from the cited earlier designs.
  • The Division found the applicant had not proven that the ribbing and other essential features were chosen exclusively for technical reasons under Article 8(1).
  • The Division accepted disclosure of D1 and D2 but found visible differences in shape, base, ribbing, lens color, and front profile, so the contested design had individual character.
  • The invalidity application was rejected, and the applicant was ordered to pay the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Deciding panel

  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
  • MemberIvanka IVANOVA

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
deGermanoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

26.05

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000106699

vs Shenzhen Juku Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd.

2020-05-19Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)268
000102399

vs INTAV S.R.L.

2019-08-09Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)268
000101440

vs KARE Design GmbH

2019-07-09Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)268
000104899

vs Daxtor ApS

2019-05-22Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)268
000103059

vs ZHEJIANG CHINA-BEST IMPORT & EXPORT CO.,LTD

2019-05-20Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)268
000102099

vs LIQUIDLEDS LIGHTING CORP

2019-03-08Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)268
000011221

vs HANGZHOU CHENGYUE ELECTRON& ELECTRIC CO.., LTD.

2019-02-27Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)268
000011220

vs HANGZHOU CHENGYUE ELECTRON& ELECTRIC CO.., LTD.

2019-02-27Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)268