Invalidity · first instance · 2021-05-17
000111541
Contested design: 000565015-0002
Outcome
The invalidity application is upheld, the contested Community design is declared invalid, and the holder must bear the applicant's costs fixed at EUR 750.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
1. Dem Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung wird stattgegeben. 2. Das eingetragene Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmuster Nr. 000565015-0002 wird für nichtig erklärt. 3. Die Inhaberin trägt die Kosten der Antragstellerin, die auf 750 EUR festgesetzt werden.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Intercon Tierbedarf GmbHvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
Brahmkoppel 4, 24558 Henstedt-Ulzburg, Deutschland
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Brügglivia PDF extraction
Switzerland (CH)
Hofstr. 5, 8590 Romanshorn, Schweiz
Represented by
Prior art cited (1)
dog transport box ‘Typ A’
hundeboxen.de · hundeboxen.de via Internet Archive Wayback Machine · disclosed 2002-04-14
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying in particular on archived hundeboxen.de screenshots showing the earlier D1 dog transport box.
- ›The holder argued that D1's disclosure date was not sufficiently proven and that D1 created a different overall impression because of its angular details, double-door layout, and technical constraints.
- ›The Division accepted D1 as a prior web disclosure under Article 7 and found that the informed user would perceive the contested design and D1 as producing essentially the same overall impression.
- ›The invalidity ground under Article 25(1)(b) in conjunction with Articles 4(1) and 6 succeeded, so the contested design was declared invalid and the holder was ordered to pay costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
- MemberIvanka IVANOVA
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000129301 vs Yu Bao | 2026-01-23 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 30 | 8 |
| 000129536 vs WENJIU YANG | 2025-10-28 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 30 | 8 |
| 000129724 vs Shenzhen Xianluo Technology Co., Ltd. | 2025-10-20 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 30 | 8 |
| 000124016 vs EDIESI | 2024-09-11 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 30 | 8 |
| 000124036 vs EDIESI | 2024-09-11 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 30 | 8 |
| 000124035 vs EDIESI | 2024-09-11 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 30 | 8 |
| 000123279 vs Jure MARKIČ | 2024-05-29 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 30 | 8 |
| 000123434 vs Guangzhou ChongChong E-Commerce Co., Ltd. | 2024-04-30 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 30 | 8 |