DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 005830155-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2020-09-29

000110987

Contested design: 005830155-0002

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay the applicant's fixed costs of EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 005830155-0002 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the applicant's costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Huang Xinyanvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

No. 62 Guanghua Group, Liuyuan Village, Qiligang Township, Linchuan District, Fuzhou City, Jiangxi Province, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

Dimitris Morides

Holder · RCD owner

Cao Yangvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

No.19, Group 1, Huodi Village, Jiangkou Town, Yunyang County, Chongqing, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

IntellectPol IP Law Firm

Sławomir Krzysztof Nowicki

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureD1

Fruitman Gadgets Ballpoint Pen

ASIN B077XBPRM1 · www.amazon.de · disclosed 2017-12-17

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 at least on the earlier Fruitman Gadgets Ballpoint Pen disclosed on Amazon before the filing date.
  • The holder filed no observations in reply to the invalidity application or the evidence of prior disclosure.
  • The Division accepted the Amazon extract and customer reviews as solid evidence that D1 was publicly disclosed before the contested RCD filing date.
  • It found the additional ruler prevented identity under Article 5, but not a different overall impression under Article 6, so the RCD lacked individual character and was invalidated.

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

19.06

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131384

vs Ningbo Yinzhou Wowo International Trade Co., Ltd.

2026-03-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000131626

vs Ningbo Yinzhou Wowo International Trade Co., Ltd.

2026-03-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000130967

vs Shenzhen Zhimei Chuangke E-commerce Co., Ltd.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000127580

vs JADWIGA ŁOWKIEWICZ

2025-10-22REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000129366

vs FHU Jarosław Wolski

2025-10-16REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000129423

vs AFFARGO LTD

2025-10-14REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000128919

vs Shenzhen Langmi Technology Co., Ltd

2025-07-31REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000126063

vs STADA Arzneimittel AG

2024-10-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198