DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003320555-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2021-03-18

000107659

Contested design: 003320555-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay EUR 750 in costs.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 0033205550001 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

Handelsmaatschappij J. Van Hilst B. V.via PDF extraction

Netherlands (NL)

Elzenweg 19, 5144 MB Waalwijk, Netherlands

Represented by

Holla Advocaten

Holder · RCD owner

Puma SEvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

PUMA Way 1, 91074 Herzogenaurach, Germany

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureAnnex I

Rihanna preview of Puma 'Creeper' sneaker showing a flat, vertically-striped crepe sole

Footwear News article 'Has Rihanna just revealed her first Puma collaboration shoes?' · Footwear News · disclosed 2015-07-08

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 5(1)Article 7(1)Article 7(2)(b)

Argument summary

  • Applicant argued the sole shown in the contested RCD had been publicly disclosed before the grace period through Rihanna-related online publications and public appearances.
  • Holder said the application was inadmissible for bad faith and contractual reasons and denied the cited internet materials reliably disclosed the relevant shoe to EU specialist circles.
  • The Division rejected the inadmissibility objections, admitted the supplementary evidence, and found Annex I was a reliable internet disclosure before 25/07/2015.
  • Comparing only the protected sole features, the Division found the prior design identical to the contested RCD and declared the design invalid for lack of novelty.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila CELISOVA
  • MemberJessica LEWIS
  • MemberCarmen SÁNCHEZ PALOMARES

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

02.04

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