DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002724369-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-12-23

000105464

Contested design: 002724369-0001

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 002724369-0001 is rejected. 2. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Consortium Menager Parisienvia PDF extraction

France (FR)

12 rue des Gravilliers, 75003 Paris, France

Represented by

Mark & Law

Holder · RCD owner

SNV Creations Inc.

CA

1600 d’Iberville, St. Bruno J3V 4L7, Canada

Prior art cited (3)

Registered RCDD1

scissors

RCD No 001841669-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2011-04-05

National designD2

scissors

US D484,378 S · United States Patent Database / USPTO Official Gazette · disclosed 2003-12-30

PatentD3

shellfish cutting and eating utensils

US 6,503,137 B2 · United States Patent Database · disclosed 2003-01-07

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4Article 6(1)(b)Article 7(1)Article 8(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity, arguing the shellfish-scissors design lacked individual character over D1-D3 and that its essential appearance features were solely dictated by technical function.
  • The holder argued the application was inadmissible, disclosure of the prior designs was unproven, features from multiple earlier designs could not be combined, and Article 8(1) did not invalidate the whole design.
  • The Division held D1-D3 were properly disclosed, but the applicant proved at most that the hooked blade mainly served a technical purpose, not that all essential features were solely functional.
  • Comparing each prior design as a whole, the Division found the contested RCD's asymmetry, flowing contour, thicker handles, and toothed middle part created a different overall impression, so the application was rejected.

Deciding panel

  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
  • MemberMichelle Marie DELLACHERIE

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

07.04

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000108801

vs BERLIN PACKAGING FRANCE

2020-10-23Invalidity application rejected076
000000003

vs Franke Technology and Trademark Ltd

2019-08-06Invalidity application rejected076
000000001

vs Franke Technology and Trademark Ltd

2019-08-06Invalidity application rejected076
000000002

vs Franke Technology and Trademark Ltd

2019-08-06Invalidity application rejected076
000010924

vs Novelis Deutschland GmbH

2019-06-28Invalidity application rejected076
000101841

vs Richard Andrews

2019-06-25Invalidity application rejected076
000010703

vs Jelenia Plast sp. z o.o.

2019-05-29Invalidity application rejected076
000102859

vs Syzan Sp. z o.o.

2019-04-25Invalidity application rejected076