DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002745554-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2020-04-06

000106599

Contested design: 002745554-0002

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 0027455540002 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

ALBATROS International GmbHvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Konrad-Zuse-Str. 3, 54552 Nerdlen, Germany

Holder · RCD owner

Homy Casa Limited

China (CN)

Second booth of No. 81, He'an Street, Xi'hua Road, Liwan District GuangZhou, the People's Republic of China

Represented by

Epsilon Avocats

Grimaud Valat

Prior art cited (5)

Web disclosureD1

chair

https://www.amazon.de/ · German Amazon platform · disclosed 2012-10-16

Web disclosureD2⚠ rejected as evidence

chair

German Amazon platform

Web disclosureAnnexes LHR 3-9⚠ rejected as evidence

various chair designs

https://www.moemax.de/; https://www.home24.de/ · moemax.de and home24.de

CatalogAnnex LHR 11⚠ rejected as evidence

extract from the catalogue 'Create Exquisite Life'

Create Exquisite Life

CatalogAnnex LHR 12⚠ rejected as evidence

extract from the catalogue 'Modern and Minimalism'

Modern and Minimalism

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying on Amazon and other website disclosures of earlier chair designs.
  • The holder disputed disclosure, arguing the Amazon evidence was unreliable or modified and that the other cited web extracts were undated.
  • The Division accepted D1 as disclosed on Amazon from 16/10/2012 but found the contested design differed by a colourful ribbon on the seat and backrest edge.
  • The remaining designs were undated or inadmissibly introduced later, so the application was rejected and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Deciding panel

  • MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI - ALOISI
  • MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
  • MemberKelly BENNETT

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

06.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000127357

vs ED-Lifestyle Polstermöbel GmbH & Co. KG

2025-02-13Art 25(1)(b)067
000127356

vs ED-Lifestyle Polstermöbel GmbH & Co. KG

2025-02-12Art 25(1)(b)067
000127340

vs ED-Lifestyle Polstermöbel GmbH & Co. KG

2025-02-06Art 25(1)(b)067
000121199

vs MANUTTI BVBA

2024-05-16Art 25(1)(b)067
000120920

vs Sergiy Fatkulayev

2024-03-27Art 25(1)(b)067
000120868

vs Sergiy Fatkulayev

2024-03-27Art 25(1)(b)067
000120869

vs Sergiy Fatkulayev

2024-03-27Art 25(1)(b)067
000120918

vs Sergiy Fatkulayev

2024-03-27Art 25(1)(b)067