DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002691410-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-02-01

000113441

Contested design: 002691410-0001

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The application for a declaration of invalidity is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text(de)

1. Der Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung des eingetragenen Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmusters Nr. 002691410-0001 wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten der Inhaberin, die auf 400 EUR festgesetzt werden.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Diewe Wheels GmbHvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Industriestraße 21, 86438 Kissing, Deutschland

Holder · RCD owner

Daimler AGvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Mercedesstr. 120, 70372 Stuttgart, Deutschland

Prior art cited (4)

CatalogD1

Audi wheel rim design

Audi Q3 catalog; Audi Life Kundenmagazin

Web disclosureD2

Nissan wheel rim design

auto-motor-und-sport.de article "Nissan Qashqai 2014 im ersten Test" · auto-motor-und-sport.de · disclosed 2014-02-14

Web disclosureD3

Oxxo wheel rim design

youtube.com video "FelgenOutlet.de – Oxxo · Oberon 5 · Silver" · YouTube · disclosed 2014-12-10

Registered RCDD4

Daimler wheel rim design

RCD No 002351247-0003 · EUIPO eSearch · disclosed 2015-02-16

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5(1)(b)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7(1)Article 7(2)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character over four earlier wheel-rim designs labelled D1 to D4.
  • The holder disputed disclosure of D1, argued D1 to D3 created different overall impressions, and invoked the Article 7(2) grace period for D4.
  • The Division found D1 to D3 had been disclosed before filing, but each produced a different overall impression from the contested design despite some shared wheel-rim features.
  • D4 was excluded under the twelve-month grace period, the novelty and individual-character claims failed, and the invalidity application was rejected with costs against the applicant.

Deciding panel

  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberIvanka IVANOVA

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
deGermanoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

12.16

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000122874

vs Great Wall Motor Company Limited

2026-05-29Art 25(1)(b)127
000129537

vs AST - Advanced Sailing Technologies GmbH

2026-05-11Art 25(1)(b)127
000129519

vs AST - Advanced Sailing Technologies GmbH

2026-05-11Art 25(1)(b)127
000124336

vs Radosław Pryba

2024-11-29Art 25(1)(b)127
000124339

vs Radosław Pryba

2024-11-29Art 25(1)(b)127
000126216

vs Yiwu Guanze Trading Co., Ltd.

2024-10-21Art 25(1)(b)127
000120438

vs CYBEX GmbH

2024-05-29Art 25(1)(b)127
000120399

vs CYBEX GmbH

2024-05-29Art 25(1)(b)127