Invalidity · first instance · 2020-12-11
000109101
Contested design: 005887007-0002
Outcome
The application for a declaration of invalidity is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
1. Der Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung des eingetragenen Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmusters Nr. 005887007-0002 wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten der Inhaberin, die auf 400 EUR festgesetzt werden.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Westenhorst GmbH & Co. KGvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
Paulsburg 1-3, 59302 Oelde, Deutschland
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
MBG Holding GmbHvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
Oberes Feld 13, 33106 Paderborn, Deutschland
Represented by
Prior art cited (2)
three-dimensional bottle shape marks relied on as prior design disclosure
European Union trade mark No. 8 485 121; German trade marks No. 30 2008 040 066 and No. 30 2008 040 067 · EUIPO eSearch / EU trade mark publication · disclosed 2009-11-09
"Absolut Facet" bottle
berlinbottle.de; amazon.de; de.wikipedia.org · web pages submitted by the applicant · disclosed 2016-10-01
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character over D1 and alleged use of earlier distinctive marks under Article 25(1)(e), also citing the claimed 2016 'Absolut Facet' bottle as D2.
- ›The holder denied any lack of novelty or individual character, disputed the relevance and proof of the cited earlier forms, argued the compared bottles created different overall impressions, and denied trademark confusion.
- ›The Division accepted disclosure of D1 through the earlier EU trade mark publication but found D2 not proven as a valid prior disclosure and refused to treat a later-mentioned revised bottle as part of the pleaded prior art.
- ›Comparing the contested design with D1, the Division found substantial differences in proportions, shoulder shape, surface structure, and decorative elements, so the contested bottle had individual character and novelty and did not create trademark confusion or prove reputation-based infringement.
- ›The invalidity application was rejected in full and costs of EUR 400 were awarded against the applicant.
Deciding panel
- MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
- MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deGerman | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000131525 vs Berentzen-Gruppe Aktiengesellschaft | 2026-03-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000131524 vs Berentzen-Gruppe Aktiengesellschaft | 2026-03-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000131506 vs Berentzen-Gruppe Aktiengesellschaft | 2026-03-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000131526 vs Berentzen-Gruppe Aktiengesellschaft | 2026-03-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000131527 vs Berentzen-Gruppe Aktiengesellschaft | 2026-03-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000131528 vs Berentzen-Gruppe Aktiengesellschaft | 2026-03-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000131544 vs Berentzen-Gruppe Aktiengesellschaft | 2026-03-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000131504 vs Berentzen-Gruppe Aktiengesellschaft | 2026-03-24 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |