Invalidity · first instance · 2021-11-30
000110064
Contested design: 006402582-0003
Outcome
The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay EUR 750 in costs.
Show verbatim operative text
1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 006402582-0003 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Profplastvia PDF extraction
Poland (PL)
Stary Węgrzynów 39, 28350 Słupia Jedrzejowska, Poland
Represented by
Anna Maja Sokołowska-Ławniczak
Holder · RCD owner
Nuitech LTDvia PDF extraction
United Kingdom (GB)
C220d Trident Business Centre 89, Bickersteth Road, London, City of London SW17 9SH, United Kingdom
Prior art cited (3)
PF1B2 and PF1C2 plastic clamping profiles for air filters sold to Kluge Luftfilter GmbH
Invoice FU/2017/000265 · Applicant invoice and delivery confirmation · disclosed 2017-12-07
Pocket filter in a plastic frame showing PF1B2 and PF1C2 clamping profiles
PDF catalogue dated 2015 · Applicant website downloadable catalogue
Depictions of PF1B2 and PF1C2 products referring to the applicant
ASMP webpage archived by Wayback Machine · Wayback Machine / ASMP website · disclosed 2016-11-01
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›Applicant claimed the contested ventilation profile design lacked novelty and individual character because its PF1B2 and PF1C2 profiles had been marketed and disclosed before the April 2019 filing date.
- ›Holder argued the application wrongly relied on Article 25(1)(d), that technical constraints limited design freedom, and that differences in colour, spacing and profile details created a different overall impression.
- ›The Division found the application was based on Article 25(1)(b), accepted the catalogue, invoice and Wayback evidence as proving prior disclosure, and considered designer freedom at least average.
- ›Comparing the profiles, the Division held the shared shape and hook configuration outweighed minor finish and colour differences, so the contested design produced the same overall impression and lacked individual character.
- ›The application was upheld, the contested design was declared invalid, and the holder was ordered to bear the costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila CELISOVA
- MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES
- MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENE
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000132264 vs SHANDONG QIYUE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY CO.,LTD | 2026-05-26 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 23 | 8 |
| 000131884 vs Zhaoqing Mikasi Home Hardware Co., LTD | 2026-03-27 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 23 | 8 |
| 000130601 vs Zhou Canbin | 2026-01-15 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 23 | 8 |
| 000127275 vs GRZEGORZ PIĄTEK PHU "TOP SERVIS" | 2025-09-17 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 23 | 8 |
| 000128177 vs DECATHLON | 2025-08-11 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 23 | 8 |
| 000126775 vs Ecomsoul Pro SRL | 2025-07-11 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 23 | 8 |
| 000126715 | 2025-07-10 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 23 | 8 |
| 000128196 vs Rafał Sowa | 2025-07-08 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 23 | 8 |