DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 006375747-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2020-10-08

000109261

Contested design: 006375747-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

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

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 006375747-0001 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

Sulan Ouvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

2 Haihua Rd, Jiyang Dist. Sanya, Hainan, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

ARCADE & ASOCIADOS

Holder · RCD owner

JIAWEI QIUvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

No. 12, ShiHuang Temple, Lianfeng Village, Fengqiao Town, Nanhu District, Jiaxing City, Zhejiang Province, 314000, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

Manuel DE ARPE TEJERO

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureD1

jacket published on www.amazon.fr

ASIN B07MTJ5FP3 · www.amazon.fr · disclosed 2019-01-14

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • Applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character over several earlier jacket designs, relying in particular on D1 disclosed on Amazon.fr.
  • Holder filed no observations in reply and did not contest disclosure, designer freedom, or the comparison with the earlier design.
  • The Division accepted Annex 5 and the Amazon.fr extract for ASIN B07MTJ5FP3 as solid evidence that D1 was publicly available before the filing date.
  • Given broad designer freedom for jackets, the shared layered construction, hood, pockets, zippers, and decorative elements outweighed minor differences and produced the same overall impression.
  • The application was upheld because the contested design lacked individual character under Article 6(1)(b) CDR, so novelty and other prior designs were not examined further.

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

02.02

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000132104

vs Shenzhen Damai Network Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-05-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000127579

vs VICTORIA CARLOTA TERCEÑO JIMENEZ

2026-04-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000131324

vs Song Li

2026-03-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130815

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130769

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130811

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130812

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130814

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028