DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 005666690-0006

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-02-02

000114841

Contested design: 005666690-0006

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 0056666900006 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

2 Original BVBAvia PDF extraction

Belgium (BE)

Eksterstraat 1, 2360 Oud-Turnhout, Belgium

Holder · RCD owner

Grimm’s GmbHvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Ostring 1, 73269 Hochdorf, Germany

Represented by

Elena Grecu

Prior art cited (2)

Web disclosureD1

Archived screenshot of the holder's website showing the rainbow toy

http://www.grimms.eu · Archive.org · disclosed 2015-03-14

Web disclosureD2

Amazon page for the holder's 12-Piece Rainbow Stacker with customer comments and images

Amazon · disclosed 2016-04-19

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 5(1)(b)Article 7

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity because the holder had already disclosed the same 12-piece rainbow toy before 28/09/2017, outside the one-year grace period.
  • The holder objected to untranslated exhibits and argued the archive.org and Amazon screenshots were unreliable and did not prove a disclosure known in the EU market.
  • The Division accepted D1 and D2 as complementary internet evidence, found the product publicly available at least since 2015, and rejected the translation and manipulation objections.
  • The prior and contested designs were identical, so novelty was destroyed under Article 5(1)(b) CDR; the application was upheld and costs were awarded against the holder.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberJessica N. LEWIS
  • MemberCarmen SÁNCHEZ PALOMARES

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
deDeutsch (de)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
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

21.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131885

vs Zhenkai Cui

2026-04-30REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000129622

vs Squar3D Aps

2026-04-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000129681

vs Squar3D Aps

2026-04-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000126976

vs Dohány Kft.

2026-04-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000131547

vs Brandworl Management Co., Limited

2026-04-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000131507

vs Shenzhen Chenyu New Energy Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-03-31REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000130128

vs joboo GmbH

2026-02-03REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000130086

vs CROSS BORDEP (HK) CO., LIMITED

2026-02-02REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218