DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 007761895-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2021-10-27

000112484

Contested design: 007761895-0002

CDR

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

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 007761895-0002 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Jürgen Heckelsmüllervia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Ottobeurer Straße 15, 87784 Westerheim, Germany

Represented by

Reiner Helge

Holder · RCD owner

Michał Cukrowski

Poland (PL)

Ul. Wybickiego 72/6, 87-100 Toruń, Poland

Represented by

Katarzyna Natalia Krupa-Lipińwka

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCDD1

grating design for ground reinforcement / protective grilles

Community design registration No 005301595-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2018-07-02

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character over earlier RCD D1, arguing the designs were essentially identical grating plates.
  • The holder argued the designs differed in chamber shape, grid density, connectors, openings, and embossments, and said technical constraints for airfield gratings limited design freedom.
  • The Division found D1 had been validly disclosed, considered designer freedom relatively broad, and held the visual differences were too minor to alter the overall impression on the informed user.
  • The application succeeded under Article 25(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 6(1)(b), so the contested design was declared invalid and the holder was ordered to pay costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES
  • MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENĖ

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

25.02

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000112521

vs Michał Cukrowski

2021-11-23REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b)2510
000129804

vs Mirosław Mytnik StudioDelta.pl

2026-05-06REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000129781

vs SHANGHAI KENDA INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD.

2026-02-09REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000126955

vs Decora S.A.

2026-01-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000129761

vs Shanghai Kenda Industrial Co.,Ltd.

2025-11-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000127177

vs Hermanus Johannes Matheus Verdegaal

2025-10-14REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000129361

vs Xiaoxia LI

2025-10-09REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000129266

vs Taiyuan Jiuchangsheng Trading Co., Ltd.

2025-10-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258