DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008558431-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2021-12-20

000116227

Contested design: 008558431-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

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 0085584310001 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

Qinghao Linvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

17 Shagang Lane, Chengnan Community, Fengxiang Sub-district, Chenghai District, Shantou, Guangdong 515800, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

Zhengnan Gong

Holder · RCD owner

Shenzhen Jiamite Trading Co., Ltd.

China (CN)

606609, Building E, No. 416, Huarong Road, Langkou Community, Dalang Street, Longhua District, Shenzhen, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

Isabelle Bertaux

Prior art cited (3)

National designAnnex 1

Toy knitting machine (penguin)

CN 302896187 S · China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) patent database · disclosed 2014-07-30

Web disclosure

same knitting machine design presented on the YouTube portal before the contested filing date

YouTube · YouTube

Prior use

same or highly similar knitting machines sold by other business entities before the contested filing date

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued the contested knitting machine design lacked novelty and individual character because the same design had already been disclosed before 31/05/2021.
  • The applicant relied on a 30/07/2014 CNIPA design patent publication, YouTube disclosure, and prior market sales by other businesses.
  • The holder filed no observations in response to the invalidity application.
  • The Division accepted the 2014 CNIPA design as prior disclosure and found the contested design practically identical apart from negligible detail differences.
  • The application was upheld because the contested design lacked individual character under Article 6(1)(b) CDR.

Deciding panel

  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
  • MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI - ALOISI

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

15.06

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000132185

vs Baofeng LIU

2026-05-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)158
000132204

vs Baofeng LIU

2026-05-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)158
000132064

vs Han Sheng

2026-05-06REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)158
000131827

vs linbo GAO

2026-04-28REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)158
000131826

vs linbo GAO

2026-04-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)158
000131787

vs linbo GAO

2026-04-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)158
000131088

vs ZhiAo Zhou

2026-03-18REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)158
000129841

vs Suzhou Kingbow Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd

2026-01-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)158