Invalidity · first instance · 2021-11-05
000116048
Contested design: 006378071-0002
Outcome
The invalidity application is upheld, Registered Community design No 006378071-0002 is declared invalid, and the holder must bear costs fixed at EUR 750.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
1. Dem Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung wird stattgegeben. 2. Das eingetragene Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmuster Nr. 006378071-0002 wird für nichtig erklärt. 3. Die Inhaberin trägt die Kosten, die auf 750 EUR festgesetzt werden.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Progress Profiles SpAvia PDF extraction
Italy (IT)
Via le Marze, 7, 31011 Asolo (TV), Italien
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Schlüter-Systems KG
Germany (DE)
Schmölestr. 7, 58640 Iserlohn, Deutschland
Represented by
Prior art cited (5)
Social-media post showing the product 'Schlüter®-DITRA'
facebook.com · facebook.com · disclosed 2015-01-16
Price list excerpts for 'Schlüter®-DITRA' valid from 01/01/2001
Schlüter Systems price list for Germany · disclosed 2001-01-01
Price list excerpts for 'Schlüter®-DITRA' valid from 01/01/2004
Schlüter Systems price list for Germany · disclosed 2004-01-01
Price list excerpts for 'Schlüter®-DITRA' valid from 01/01/2005
Schlüter Systems price list for Germany · disclosed 2005-01-01
European patent said to contain the same DITRA mat design
EP1073813B2
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, and also argued the design's visible features were solely technically dictated.
- ›It relied on long-standing disclosures of the DITRA mat, including Facebook images, German price lists from 2001, 2004 and 2005, and EP1073813B2.
- ›The holder filed no observations within the time limit set by the Office.
- ›The Division found the earlier Facebook disclosure proven and held the contested design identical to the earlier design, with only an immaterial colour-tone difference.
- ›The application was upheld on Article 25(1)(b) in conjunction with Articles 4(1) and 5(1)(b); the contested RCD was invalidated and costs were awarded against the holder.
Deciding panel
- MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000129804 vs Mirosław Mytnik StudioDelta.pl | 2026-05-06 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 8 |
| 000129781 vs SHANGHAI KENDA INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD. | 2026-02-09 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 8 |
| 000126955 vs Decora S.A. | 2026-01-29 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 8 |
| 000129761 vs Shanghai Kenda Industrial Co.,Ltd. | 2025-11-13 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 8 |
| 000127177 vs Hermanus Johannes Matheus Verdegaal | 2025-10-14 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 8 |
| 000129361 vs Xiaoxia LI | 2025-10-09 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 8 |
| 000129266 vs Taiyuan Jiuchangsheng Trading Co., Ltd. | 2025-10-07 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 8 |
| 000124779 vs D.ELLINAS FACTORY PRODUCTS LTD | 2025-06-25 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 8 |