DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 006780656-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2021-07-19

000114682

Contested design: 006780656-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay the applicant's costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 0067806560001 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

Shenzhen Jinxi Information Technology Ltd., Co.via PDF extraction

China (CN)

703B, Yong Gan Road No. 50, Wu He Community, Street Ban Tian, Long Gang District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province 518129, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

Yaotian Chai

Holder · RCD owner

Weiping Liu

China (CN)

No. 46, Huiranchong, Huiliu Village, Jiguanshan Township, Shangli County, Pingxiang City, Jiangxi, Pingxiang Jiangxi 337000, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

Marcella Clarke

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureD1

Fancyus inflatable Antler Hat Ring toy

ASIN B01MCW5NVQ · amazon.co.uk · disclosed 2016-10-20

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7

Argument summary

  • The applicant alleged the contested inflatable toy lacked novelty and individual character because the same design had been sold in China and the EU since 2014, and relied in particular on Amazon listing D1.
  • The holder filed no observations in reply.
  • The Division accepted D1 as prior disclosure because the Amazon listing and ASIN evidence showed availability from 20 October 2016, before the RCD filing date.
  • Comparing overall impressions, the Division found the contested design reproduced the key shape, branches, ties, and appearance of D1, and minor colour differences did not matter.
  • The application succeeded under Article 25(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 4(1) and Article 6(1)(b), so the RCD was declared invalid in full.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila CELISOVA
  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI - ALOISI

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

21.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131885

vs Zhenkai Cui

2026-04-30REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000129622

vs Squar3D Aps

2026-04-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000129681

vs Squar3D Aps

2026-04-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000126976

vs Dohány Kft.

2026-04-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000131547

vs Brandworl Management Co., Limited

2026-04-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000131507

vs Shenzhen Chenyu New Energy Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-03-31REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000130128

vs joboo GmbH

2026-02-03REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000130086

vs CROSS BORDEP (HK) CO., LIMITED

2026-02-02REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218