Invalidity · first instance · 2020-10-23
000108801
Contested design: 006301891-0007
Outcome
The invalidity application against registered Community design No 006301891-0007 is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text(fr)
1. La demande en nullité à l'encontre du dessin ou modèle communautaire enregistré nº 006301891-0007 est rejetée. 2. La demanderesse supporte les frais exposés par la titulaire, fixés à 400 EUR.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
SAVERGLASSvia PDF extraction
France (FR)
3, Rue de la Gare, 60960 Feuquières, France
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
DISCOvia PDF extraction
France (FR)
Avenue des Tortulas, 16100 Merpins, France
Represented by
Prior art cited (2)
DISTIL’ER bottle
RCD No 002621763-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2015-01-30
online catalog extract showing the DISTIL’ER model
http://www.saverglass.com · saverglass.com
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity under Articles 25(1)(b), 4, 5, 6 and 7 CDR, relying mainly on earlier RCD No 002621763-0001 DISTIL’ER and arguing lack of novelty and individual character.
- ›The holder argued that extra commercial views could not prove novelty, identified multiple shape differences, and maintained that those differences gave the contested carafe a different overall impression.
- ›The Division accepted disclosure of the earlier RCD through its bulletin publication but found the compared designs were not identical, so the novelty claim failed.
- ›For individual character, the Division treated common bottle or carafe features as low-weight constraints and found the neck rings, proportions, base and punt created a clearly different overall impression.
- ›The invalidity application was rejected and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberJessica LEWIS
- MemberMichelle Marie DELLACHERIE
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frFrench | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Locarno classes
Similar decisions
Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.
| Case | Date | Outcome | Shared grounds | Locarno | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000000001 vs Franke Technology and Trademark Ltd | 2019-08-06 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 07 | 8 |
| 000000002 vs Franke Technology and Trademark Ltd | 2019-08-06 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 07 | 8 |
| 000000003 vs Franke Technology and Trademark Ltd | 2019-08-06 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 07 | 8 |
| 000010924 vs Novelis Deutschland GmbH | 2019-06-28 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 07 | 8 |
| 000101841 vs Richard Andrews | 2019-06-25 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 07 | 8 |
| 000102859 vs Syzan Sp. z o.o. | 2019-04-25 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 07 | 8 |
| 000103839 vs SEMIR RAAD MAROKI | 2019-02-25 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 07 | 8 |
| 000103919 vs SEMIR RAAD MAROKI | 2019-01-31 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 07 | 8 |