DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008438477-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2021-09-22

000115382

Contested design: 008438477-0002

CDRmedium-confidence extraction

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld; the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must bear costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 0084384770002 is declared invalid. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Domain Menada EOODvia PDF extraction

Bulgaria (BG)

Business Park Sofia 1, bl. 4, fl. 2, Sofia, Bulgaria

Represented by

Deyan Vulchev Ivanov

Holder · RCD owner

Nuvo Konsept EOODvia PDF extraction

Bulgaria (BG)

бул. Ал.Дондуков № 57, вх. А, ет. 1, ап. 6, 1000 София, Bulgaria

Represented by

Atanas Kostov

Prior art cited (5)

Prior use

bottle of an alcoholic beverage sold by the applicant

Trade mark

earlier trade mark label published before the filing of the contested design

TMview

Trade mark

earlier trade mark label published before the filing of the contested design

TMview

Web disclosure

0.5L beverage bottle shown in the METRO Romania 'mp24' product catalogue

https://issuu.com/proomo-romania/docs/mcc_romania_mp24_oferte_alimentare · issuu.com / METRO Romania product catalogue · disclosed 2012-11-29

Web disclosure

0.5L beverage bottle shown in the METRO Romania 'mp02' product catalogue

https://issuu.com/cataro/docs/mcc_romania_mp02_produse_alimentare · issuu.com / METRO Romania product catalogue · disclosed 2013-01-24

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of individual character, relying on an earlier alcoholic-beverage bottle, two earlier trade marks, and METRO Romania catalogue disclosures published online before the filing date.
  • The holder argued the application lacked legal basis because the applicant did not own the invoked trade marks and because the compared subject matters were different, so the request should be rejected.
  • The Invalidity Division accepted the ISSUU catalogue evidence as proof of prior disclosure and compared the contested bottle primarily with the 'mp24' catalogue bottle from the perspective of the informed user of bottled alcoholic beverages.
  • It found the bottle shapes and the most eye-catching label elements highly similar, so the differences did not change the overall impression; the contested design therefore lacked individual character.

Deciding panel

  • MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI-ALOISI
  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberMichelle Marie DELLACHERIE

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

09.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131325

vs HaoJun Zhu

2026-05-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000131965

vs Jiaxing Xiaotian Environmental Protection Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-05-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000130985

vs Suzhou Hongmao Import & Export Trade Co.,Ltd

2026-03-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000130944

vs Shenzhen Tajinxuan Trading Co.,Ltd.

2026-02-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000130968

vs Shenzhen Zhimei Chuangke E-commerce Co., Ltd.

2026-02-05REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000129539

vs MOHAMAR JAMOU

2026-01-14REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000130088

vs Mindful eCom OÜ

2025-12-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000129281

vs VERONIKI ECOGRUP SRL

2025-11-04REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098