Invalidity · first instance · 2022-02-08
000115908
Contested design: 006792180-0005
Outcome
The application for a declaration of invalidity of Registered Community design No 006792180-0005 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. 006792180-0005 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
Huhtamäki Oyjvia PDF extraction
Finland (FI)
Revontulenkuja 1, 02100 Espoo, Finland
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Seda International Packaging Group SpAvia PDF extraction
Italy (IT)
Corso Salvatore D'Amato 73, 80022 Arzano Napoli, Italien
Represented by
Prior art cited (7)
cup lid shown in Figs. 35-39
EP 2 674 370 A1 · European patent publication · disclosed 2013-12-18
cup lid shown in Figs. 45-49
EP 2 674 370 A1 · European patent publication · disclosed 2013-12-18
lid for a container
CN 105857894 B · Chinese patent publication · disclosed 2017-12-05
paperboard cup lid
WO 2016/069755 A1 · WIPO patent publication · disclosed 2016-05-06
container lid shown in Figs. 8a-8d
DE 10 2014 219 272 A1 · German patent publication · disclosed 2016-03-24
container lid shown in Figs. 12a-12d
DE 10 2014 219 272 A1 · German patent publication · disclosed 2016-03-24
paper-based container lid
WO 2014/031880 A1 · WIPO patent publication · disclosed 2014-02-27
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued that the contested cup-lid design was inconsistently represented, technically dictated in key features, and lacked novelty and individual character over D1-D7.
- ›The holder replied that the views showed one product in different states, the cited lid features were not purely functional, and the earlier designs created different overall impressions.
- ›The Division found the representation sufficiently clear under Article 3(a), accepted the patent documents as prior disclosures, and held that the cited lids were not identical and conveyed different overall impressions.
- ›The invalidity application was rejected and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
- MemberIvanka IVANOVA
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deGerman | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000115907 vs SEDA INTERNATIONAL PACKAGING GROUP SPA | 2022-02-09 | — | Art 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a) | 09 | 9 |
| 000114521 vs CRIS-TIM COMPANIE DE FAMILIE SRL | 2021-09-08 | — | Art 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a) | 09 | 9 |
| 000115122 vs DUHAMEL SEBASTIEN | 2021-07-12 | — | Art 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a) | 09 | 9 |
| 000115888 vs SEDA INTERNATIONAL PACKAGING GROUP SPA | 2022-02-09 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 8 |
| 000104119 vs Dzhihangir Ibryam | 2019-10-17 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 8 |
| 000103859 vs PHOENIX IND SA | 2019-07-26 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 8 |
| 000011140 vs GAMMA-A, SIA | 2019-02-25 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 8 |
| 000011251 vs Guy Vanhoutte | 2019-01-28 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 8 |