Invalidity · first instance · 2021-03-10
000109762
Contested design: 006588778-0001
Outcome
The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holders’ costs.
Show verbatim operative text
1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 0065887780001 is rejected. 2. The applicant bears the holders’ costs.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
PhiAcademy GmbHvia PDF extraction
Austria (AT)
Gartengasse 8/8, 1050 Vienna, Austria
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Margus Mytsvia PDF extraction
Finland (FI)
Hiilimäentie 26, 29630 Pori, Pomarkku, Finland
Prior art cited (4)
Posts and extracts allegedly showing the Phinjection needle-free injector and related training-event advertising.
https://www.phi-academy.com/treatment/phinjection/; https://www.instagram.com/phinjection_andjela_lipovac/; https://www.instagram.com/branko_babic_phiacademy/; https://www.instagram.com/p/BxGEZJhgsv_/ · PhiAcademy website, Instagram and Facebook
Google web-search results offered to show online disclosure of the Phinjection product.
Google search results for "Phinjection" limited to 2019-02-01 to 2019-06-10 · Google
Invoices referring to adapters, ampoules, a needle-free injector set, and Phinjection materials.
Three invoices dated between 2019-02-12 and 2019-03-26
Undated brochure for the Phinjection needle-free pen explaining its characteristics and use.
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, alleging prior public marketing of an identical Phinjection injector before the RCD filing date.
- ›The holders filed no observations in reply to the invalidity application.
- ›The Division found the hyperlinks, social-media extracts, Google results, invoices, and brochure insufficient to prove a prior design was disclosed under Article 7 CDR.
- ›Because prior disclosure was not proven, the Article 25(1)(b) challenge failed and the application was rejected with costs against the applicant.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVA
- MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
- MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENE
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000131246 vs Life Vac LLC | 2026-04-29 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |
| 000131089 vs Rongrong Gao | 2026-04-23 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |
| 000128555 vs Juliane Hesse-Ilyas | 2026-02-24 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |
| 000129035 vs OMNIOXY SPÓŁKA AKCYJNA | 2025-09-29 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |
| 000127199 vs Xiamen Tuoke Trading Co., Ltd. | 2025-03-10 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |
| 000125355 vs Shenzhen Sainuotong Technology Co., Ltd. | 2024-10-23 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |
| 000125317 vs Life Vac LLC | 2024-08-16 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |
| 000123775 vs Schunk Ingenieurkeramik GmbH | 2024-07-24 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |