Invalidity · first instance · 2022-01-28
000115204
Contested design: 008053607-0001
Outcome
The invalidity application against registered Community design No 0080536070001 is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text
1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 0080536070001 is rejected. 2. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Serena S.r.l.via PDF extraction
Italy (IT)
Via Buzzi, 14, 20017 Rho, Italy
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
U-Earth Biotech Ltd
United Kingdom (GB)
38 Craven Street, London WC2N 5NG, United Kingdom
Represented by
Prior art cited (7)
U-Mask Model Two (Product) Red on the holder's website
http://www.it.u-maskstore.eu · holder website
medical face masks, dust masks and protective face masks
RCD No 0078799450001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2020-06-25
Chinese utility model for a face mask
CN 205233539 · Chinese patent database · disclosed 2016-05-18
Pitta Mask
https://www.thebeijinger.com/blog/2019/03/04/best-pollution-masks-2019 · thebeijinger.com · disclosed 2019-03-04
Hotroad Maschera per la Bocca
https://www.amazon.it · amazon.it · disclosed 2020-04-09
Lavavel face mask as depicted in the reviewed photo
https://www.etsy.com · etsy.com · disclosed 2020-07-10
Adidas Face Mask / Face Cover
https://www.dezeen.com · dezeen.com · disclosed 2020-05-25
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying on the holder's website and six earlier mask disclosures and registrations.
- ›The holder challenged several disclosures as unreliable or insufficient, argued the informed user pays high attention, and said the contested mask's visible features create a distinct overall impression.
- ›The Division rejected D1 as unproven prior disclosure but accepted D2 to D7 as disclosed before the filing date and compared them individually with the contested design.
- ›It found multiple noticeable differences in shape, seams, eyelets, tabs, and internal refill features, so the contested design remained novel and had individual character; the application was rejected.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila CELISOVA
- MemberElisabetta FERRARO
- MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI - ALOISI
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000115163 vs U-Earth Biotech Ltd | 2022-01-28 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 29 | 7 |
| 000115205 vs U-Earth Biotech Ltd | 2022-01-28 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 29 | 7 |
| 000131848 vs Solecom-Y OÜ | 2026-05-19 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 29 | 5 |
| 000131866 vs Solecom-Y OÜ | 2026-05-19 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 29 | 5 |
| 000116451 vs Banale S.r.l. | 2022-10-04 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 29 | 5 |
| 000114081 vs ORIGINAL BUFF, S.A. | 2021-09-14 | — | — | 29 | 5 |
| 000129182 vs Guangzhou L-TEK Enterprise Co.,Ltd | 2025-09-25 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 4 |
| 000129183 vs Yi Duan | 2025-09-16 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 4 |