DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 004688521-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2020-09-23

000110221

Contested design: 004688521-0001

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 004688521-0001 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

Shenzhen Zhuoyi Sports equipment CO., LTDvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

No. 508, Yuehua Building, Taoyuan Road, Sungang Street, Luohu, Shenzhen 518000, People’s Republic of China

Holder · RCD owner

Liu Baohe

China (CN)

No.288, Linchuan Avenue,Linchuan DIST, Fuzhou City, Jiangxi Province 344000, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

Karel Mul

Prior art cited (3)

PatentD1

fragrant fragrance machine

CN 304033306 S · China · disclosed 2017-02-08

PatentD2

aromatherapy machine

CN 302031865 S · China · disclosed 2012-08-08

PatentD3

square solid wood aromatherapy humidifier

CN 304387841 S · China · disclosed 2017-12-05

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character based on three earlier Chinese design patents for fragrance or aromatherapy devices.
  • The holder filed no observations in response to the invalidity application.
  • The Division accepted disclosure of the cited designs but found D1 created a different overall impression, and D2 and D3 differed even more from the contested design.
  • The invalidity ground under Article 25(1)(b) failed, so the application was rejected and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Deciding panel

  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVA
  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO

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

28.03

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000121245

vs Piotr Malinowski

2023-07-25Art 25(1)(b)287
000130164

vs Moritz Neugebauer

2026-05-22REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)285
000129241

vs Yi Wing Global Limited

2026-05-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)285
000132044

vs Xucan XU

2026-05-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)285
000131244

vs Shenzhen Lumei E-commerce Co., Ltd.

2026-03-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)285
000130163

vs LAHC US 1 LLC

2026-03-06Art 25(1)(b)285
000129801

vs Jesus Perez Elias

2026-02-10Art 25(1)(b)285
000130964

vs Changde Yameixun Network Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-02-06REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)285