Invalidity · first instance · 2021-08-02
000112441
Contested design: 007737143-0001
Outcome
The application for a declaration of invalidity is rejected; the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
1. Der Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung des eingetragenen Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmusters Nr. 0077371430001 wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten der Inhaberin, die auf 400 EUR festgesetzt werden.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Musto Et Bureau Srlvia PDF extraction
Italy (IT)
Via Molise, 26/28, 40024 Osteria Grande (BO), Italien
Represented by
Francesco De Sanzuane
Holder · RCD owner
Rauch Furnace Technology GmbH
Austria (AT)
Fichtenweg 3, 4810 Gmunden, Österreich
Represented by
Prior art cited (7)
Applicant website page for crucibles for magnesium alloys
https://www.dittamusto.it/prodotti/crogioli-per-leghe-di-magnesio/ · dittamusto.it
Applicant website page for crucibles for zinc alloys
https://www.dittamusto.it/prodotti/crogioli-per-leghe-di-zinco · dittamusto.it
Catalog images showing magnesium and zinc crucible furnaces
applicant catalog
Invoices said to evidence earlier marketing of crucibles
applicant invoices
Display of crucible forms at the ALUMINIUM fair in Dusseldorf
ALUMINIUM fair, Messe Dusseldorf · disclosed 2012-10-09
Display of crucible forms at the IMA convention in Rome
IMA Convention, A.ROMA Lifestyle Hotel Rome · disclosed 2016-05-15
Referenced Pilling website screenshot for crucibles
https://www.pilling.de/en/crucibles.html · pilling.de
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›Applicant argued the contested crucible design was not a design, lacked novelty and individual character over longstanding market shapes, and was dictated by technical function and invisibility within furnaces.
- ›Holder replied that parts of the filing and evidence were untranslated or unsupported, no concrete earlier design or disclosure was proven, and the contested design remained new, individual, and not exclusively functional.
- ›The Division found the application admissible despite incomplete translations, denied the oral-hearing request, and held the evidence insufficient to prove prior disclosure of any specific earlier design under Article 7.
- ›It also found the crucible could remain visible in normal use and that the applicant had not shown the design's essential features were exclusively functional or must-fit.
- ›The invalidity application was rejected in full and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
- MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000132204 vs Baofeng LIU | 2026-05-26 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 15 | 7 |
| 000132185 vs Baofeng LIU | 2026-05-26 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 15 | 7 |
| 000132064 vs Han Sheng | 2026-05-06 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 15 | 7 |
| 000131827 vs linbo GAO | 2026-04-28 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 15 | 7 |
| 000131826 vs linbo GAO | 2026-04-27 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 15 | 7 |
| 000131787 vs linbo GAO | 2026-04-21 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 15 | 7 |
| 000131088 vs ZhiAo Zhou | 2026-03-18 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 15 | 7 |
| 000129841 vs Suzhou Kingbow Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd | 2026-01-26 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 15 | 7 |