DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003069616-0009

Invalidity · first instance · 2021-05-28

000109286

Contested design: 003069616-0009

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(es)

1. Se estima la solicitud de declaración de nulidad. 2. Se declara nulo el dibujo o modelo comunitario registrado nº 003069616-0009. 3. Se condena al titular a que sufrague las costas del solicitante, que se fijan en 750 EUR.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Soluciones de Iluminación LED S.L.via PDF extraction

Spain (ES)

C. Sant Joan de la Salle (Ed Technova) nº 42, 3º, 08022 Barcelona, España

Represented by

ZBM Patents

Holder · RCD owner

Vibia Lighting, S.L.U.via PDF extraction

Spain (ES)

C. Progrés, 4, 08850 Gavà, España

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureDocumentos 3-4

VIBIA 'Algorithm' hanging lamp composition / collection

archiproducts.com 'Algorithm: Vibia presents new collection designed by Toan Nguyen'; archiportale.com 'Globi luminosi sospesi, disciplinati secondo un ordine matemático: Vibia presenta Algorithm, la nuova collezione firmata Toan Nguyen' · archiproducts.com and archiportale.com · disclosed 2015-04-13

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • Applicant argued the contested lamp design lacked novelty and individual character because VIBIA disclosed the Algorithm collection online on 13 April 2015, outside the grace period.
  • Holder disputed the reliability and probative value of the web extracts and expert report, arguing disclosure occurred no earlier than 14 April 2015 and in any event was not reasonably knowable.
  • The Division found documents 3 and 4 objectively proved public online disclosure on 13 April 2015 and that EU lighting-sector circles could reasonably have known of it.
  • Comparing the prior design with the contested RCD, the Division found only insignificant differences, held the RCD not new under Article 5, and invalidated it in full.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberCarmen SÁNCHEZ PALOMARES
  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esSpanishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

26.05

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130945

vs Space Copenhagen Design ApS

2026-05-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131284

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131264

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131304

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131245

vs Venture MK UG (haftungsbeschränkt)

2026-04-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131366

vs DANMAR TECH SL

2026-04-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000131247

vs chao zhai

2026-04-02REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268
000129540

vs Ningbo Wilder Outdoor Products Co., Ltd.

2026-03-24REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)268