DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002873877-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2020-11-12

000108202

Contested design: 002873877-0002

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

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

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 0028738770002 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Datecs OODvia PDF extraction

Bulgaria (BG)

4 Datecs Street, 1784 Sophia, Bulgaria

Represented by

Keystone Law

Holder · RCD owner

Square, Inc.via PDF extraction

United States (US)

1455 Market Street, Suite 600, San Francisco CA 94103, United States of America

Represented by

Kilburn & Strode LLP

Prior art cited (5)

Registered RCDD1

media players

RCD No 0006440000004 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2007-02-06

OtherD2

portable smartcard reader

OtherD3

portable smartcard reader

OtherD4

portable smartcard reader

OtherD5

portable smartcard reader

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 6(1)Article 7Article 8(1)Article 8(2)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, arguing the design largely matched Apple prior designs and that the card-slot features were technically dictated.
  • The holder said the application was insufficiently substantiated, disputed disclosure and technical-function objections, and argued the card-slot configuration created a different overall impression.
  • The Division rejected the Article 8 objections, finding the slot features were not proven to be solely technically dictated and the disclaimed mini USB socket was irrelevant.
  • Comparing the contested design with prior design D1, the Division found nearly identical overall shape and proportions, with only minor functional differences, so the contested RCD lacked individual character and was invalidated.

Deciding panel

  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
  • MemberMichelle Marie DELLACHERIE

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

14.02

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130850

vs Michael AMARA

2026-04-23REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)148
000131224

vs Shenzhen Ruixin Fengshuo Electronic Co., Ltd

2026-03-06REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)148
000130970

vs Liu yanqiong

2026-02-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)148
000131064

vs Jinfeng Min

2026-02-25REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)148
000130524

vs Liu yanqiong

2026-02-17REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)148
000129861

vs Liu yanqiong

2025-12-23REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)148
000130565

vs Yunzeng He

2025-12-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)148
000130564

vs Yunzeng He

2025-12-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)148