DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002351247-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2020-05-18

000107119

Contested design: 002351247-0001

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. 002351247-0001 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

Paalupaikka Oyvia PDF extraction

Finland (FI)

Kivirannantie 9, PL 19, 74101 Iisalmi, Finland

Represented by

Vannetukku.fi Oy

Jonna Rossi

Holder · RCD owner

Daimler AGvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

063 - H512, 70546 Stuttgart, Deutschland

Prior art cited (1)

Catalog⚠ rejected as evidence

Mercedes-Benz E-Class price list with wheel images

Mercedes-Benz price list · disclosed 2007-07-02

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character based on an allegedly identical five-spoke wheel design disclosed in a Mercedes-Benz E-Class price list.
  • The holder argued the contested RCD remained new and individual, and that the applicant had not proven disclosure of the alleged earlier design or matched it to the price-list images.
  • The Division held that disclosure under Article 7 must be proven by concrete and objective evidence, and the only submitted price list did not show the specific earlier design relied on.
  • Because prior disclosure was not sufficiently established, the invalidity application was rejected and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.

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

12.16

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000128826

vs Shenzhen Lireder Industrial Co., Ltd.

2025-08-18Art 25(1)(b)127
000120579

vs Lohia e-mobility GmbH

2025-03-12Art 25(1)(b)127
000120480

vs VER PLAST S.r.l.

2023-11-13Art 25(1)(b)127
000120410

vs VER PLAST S.r.l.

2023-11-10Art 25(1)(b)127
000120409

vs VER PLAST S.r.l.

2023-11-10Art 25(1)(b)127
000120158

vs elobau GmbH & Co. KG

2023-11-10Art 25(1)(b)127
000118721

vs HANGZHOU CHIC INTELLIGENT TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD

2023-10-16Art 25(1)(b)127
000118758

vs HANGZHOU CHIC INTELLIGENT TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD

2023-10-16Art 25(1)(b)127