Invalidity · first instance · 2019-12-10
000105979
Contested design: 005832987-0010
Outcome
The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld; the contested Community design is declared invalid and the holder must pay the applicant's costs fixed at EUR 750.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
Dem Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung wird stattgegeben. Das eingetragene Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmuster Nr. 0058329870010 wird für nichtig erklärt. Die Inhaberin trägt die Kosten der Antragstellerin, die auf 750 EUR festgesetzt werden.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Caprice Schuhproduktion GmbH & Co. KG
Germany (DE)
Blocksbergstr. 158, 66955 Pirmasens, Deutschland
Holder · RCD owner
Sino Pro Trading B.V.via PDF extraction
Netherlands (NL)
Tilburgse Weg 58, 4902 TM Oosterhout, Niederlande
Represented by
Prior art cited (2)
shoe model / ankle boot
Isabel 26 · trade fair in Garda, Italy · disclosed 2017-01-07
shoe model Herma
Shoes Report · Shoes Report · disclosed 2017-11-15
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying mainly on earlier shoe models Isabel 26 (D1) and Herma (D2).
- ›The applicant argued D1 had been promoted and sold by the holder in January 2017 and that D2 was published in Shoes Report on 15 November 2017.
- ›The holder filed no observations, so it did not dispute the applicant's disclosure evidence or the asserted similarities.
- ›The Division found D1 sufficiently disclosed to the public before the filing date and considered the contested design identical apart from immaterial detail.
- ›The application was upheld in full, the RCD was declared invalid for lack of novelty, and the holder was ordered to pay costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
- MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
- MemberIvanka IVANOVA
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deGerman | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Locarno classes
Similar decisions
Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.
| Case | Date | Outcome | Shared grounds | Locarno | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000132104 vs Shenzhen Damai Network Technology Co., Ltd. | 2026-05-21 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000127579 vs VICTORIA CARLOTA TERCEÑO JIMENEZ | 2026-04-15 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000131324 vs Song Li | 2026-03-11 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130812 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130769 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130811 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130815 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |
| 000130814 vs CYBROG PTE. LTD. | 2026-02-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 8 |