DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 004746774-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2020-02-20

000108281

Contested design: 004746774-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld; the contested RCD is declared invalid and the holder bears the applicant's costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 004746774-0001 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

Ideavillage Products Corp.via PDF extraction

United States (US)

155 Route 46 West, Wayne NJ 07470, United States of America

Represented by

A.A. Thornton & Co.

Holder · RCD owner

Shenzhen Walikexu Information Technology Co., Ltdvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

Rm 2804, Duhuixuan, Shijihui Square, No. 3018, Shennan Rd(M), Huaqiangbei, St, Futian Dist, Shenzhen, People's Republic of China

Prior art cited (4)

Web disclosureExhibit 1

EGGLETTES egg cooking device

ASIN B077XMNHW1 (Amazon.com) · Amazon.com · disclosed 2017-12-01

Trade markExhibit 4

trademark registration extract

USPTO Trademark EGGLETTES · USPTO

Web disclosureExhibit 5

EGGLETTES product video stills

YouTube · disclosed 2018-02-05

Web disclosureExhibit 6

EGGLETTES product video stills

YouTube · disclosed 2018-03-03

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4Article 5Article 6Article 6(1)Article 6(2)Article 7

Argument summary

  • Applicant Ideavillage argued the contested egg cooker design lacked novelty and individual character over its EGGLETTES prior design, disclosed on Amazon (from 1 December 2017) and YouTube (February–March 2018), before the RCD filing date of 8 March 2018.
  • Holder submitted no observations in reply.
  • The Division accepted the Amazon listing and YouTube videos as valid disclosures; it found that both designs shared the same white translucent body with four protruding feet, red wavy-patterned lid, and handle, with only minor differences in the lid top (holes vs. closed lid, handle opening shape) that were insufficient to alter the overall impression given the wide designer freedom.
  • Application upheld on Article 25(1)(b) in conjunction with Articles 4 and 6 CDR; RCD declared invalid for lack of individual character; novelty ground not separately assessed.

Deciding panel

  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
  • MemberMichelle Marie DELLACHERIE

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

07.02

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000129741

vs 2W ORGANIC

2026-05-12REUD invalidated076
000131632

vs DETECTALIA EUROPE, S.L.U.

2026-05-12REUD invalidated076
000131788

vs Liu Xiaoxia

2026-05-08REUD invalidated076
000131628

vs Shenzhen Changhe Technology Co., Ltd

2026-04-30REUD invalidated076
000131704

vs Shenzhen Changhe Technology Co., Ltd

2026-04-29REUD invalidated076
000131745

vs Huan Wang

2026-04-21REUD invalidated076
000130924

vs SOHAI HOUSEWARES CO.,LTD.

2026-04-17REUD invalidated076
000131546

vs Foshan Changyuansheng Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-03-26REUD invalidated076