Invalidity · first instance · 2021-10-21
000114701
Contested design: 006311692-0001
Outcome
The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay the applicant’s fixed costs of EUR 750.
Show verbatim operative text
1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 0063116920001 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
Wan Huiwenvia PDF extraction
China (CN)
Room 1002, No. 2, Shuirongheng Street, Haizhu District Guangzhou, People’s Republic of China
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Shanghai Angoo Stationery Gift Co., Ltd.via PDF extraction
China (CN)
Room 2407, No. 5616, CaoAn Road, Anting Town, Jiading District Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
Represented by
Ákos Süle
Prior art cited (3)
EASTHILL Large Capacity Pencil Box
ASIN B07H6G9XX5 · Amazon.com · disclosed 2018-09-08
EASTHILL Pencil Box colour variant
https://www.amazon.com/-/zh/gp/customer-reviews/R3PV0XXZCBLINP/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B07H6G9XX5 · Amazon.com customer review · disclosed 2018-11-30
EASTHILL Pencil Box colour variant
https://www.amazon.com/-/zh/gp/customer-reviews/R2LMBI445P6UEE/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B07H6G9XX5 · Amazon.com customer review · disclosed 2018-11-25
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued that the contested pencil-case design lacked novelty and individual character because identical earlier EASTHILL designs had been disclosed online before filing.
- ›The holder disputed disclosure, arguing the Amazon printouts were unreliable, the enlarged views could not be tied to the listings, and the evidence did not show enough product views.
- ›The Division accepted the Amazon review images as sufficient disclosure of D3 before the filing date and considered other invoked designs unnecessary to decide the case.
- ›Given broad design freedom for pencil cases, the shared expandable rectangular form, two zippered compartments, and top tag created the same overall impression on the informed user.
- ›The application succeeded under Article 25(1)(b) CDR with Articles 4(1) and 6 CDR, so the RCD was declared invalid in full.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila CELISOVA
- MemberElisabetta FERRARO
- MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI - ALOISI
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000131964 vs Shenzhen Debaisite Trading Co., Ltd. | 2026-04-22 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 8 |
| 000129304 vs APRIMONIA Ltd. | 2026-03-25 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 8 |
| 000130547 vs Rong Hua | 2026-02-23 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 8 |
| 000130887 vs Suqi Zhuang | 2026-02-05 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 8 |
| 000130221 vs WITTCHEN S.A. | 2025-12-17 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 8 |
| 000130241 vs WITTCHEN S.A. | 2025-12-16 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 8 |
| 000130204 vs WITTCHEN S.A. | 2025-12-16 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 8 |
| 000130142 vs Edita Avakian | 2025-12-03 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 8 |