DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 005949849-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2020-05-29

000107839

Contested design: 005949849-0001

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 0059498490001 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

WR PRODUCTSvia PDF extraction

France (FR)

12 rue Auguste Renoir, 67170 Brumath, France

Represented by

André Guerreiro Rodrigues

Holder · RCD owner

KAI HUvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

Room 901, Unit A, Building 4, Poly City Garden, No. 2710 Nanhai Avenue, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, Guangdong, People’s Republic of China

Prior art cited (3)

Web disclosureD1

Snoofield Brush Anti Pet Hair Cat & Dog

ASIN B07HL1SZ2K · amazon.fr · disclosed 2018-09-22

Web disclosureD2

MUDEELA

ASIN B07FLZTXY8 · amazon.de · disclosed 2018-08-05

Web disclosureD3

Paku Paku Multiuse Etiquette Scooter

ASIN B016ZLI1P8 · amazon.de · disclosed 2016-04-05

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character over three earlier lint-roller designs disclosed on Amazon as D1 to D3.
  • The holder disputed the probative value of the Amazon evidence, arguing the first-availability dates and the exact invoked designs were unclear.
  • The Division found the Amazon extracts and product identifiers sufficiently proved disclosure of D1 to D3 before the RCD filing date under Article 7 CDR.
  • Comparing overall impressions, the Division held the contested design differed in decorations, colours, handle shape, and missing prior-art views, so it retained individual character and the application was rejected.

Deciding panel

  • MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI - ALOISI
  • MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
  • MemberBirgit FILTENBORG

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

07.05

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000108421

vs SEMIR RAAD MAROKI

2021-01-14Art 25(1)(b)077
000108311

vs SEMIR RAAD MAROKI

2020-07-17Art 25(1)(b)077
000108346

vs SEMIR RAAD MAROKI

2020-07-17Art 25(1)(b)077
000107299

vs Angela Jane Hartnett

2020-04-17Art 25(1)(b)077
000129481

vs Oro-Kong GmbH

2026-05-27Art 25(1)(b)075
000129503

vs Oro-Kong GmbH

2026-05-26Art 25(1)(b)075
000129483

vs Oro-Kong GmbH

2026-05-26Art 25(1)(b)075
000129484

vs Oro-Kong GmbH

2026-05-26Art 25(1)(b)075