DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003064237-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-03-02

000114781

Contested design: 003064237-0001

CDRmedium-confidence extraction

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

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

Show verbatim operative text(it)

1. La domanda di dichiarazione di nullità del disegno o modello comunitario registrato n 003064237-0001 è respinta. 2. Il richiedente sopporta l’onere delle spese del titolare, fissate a 400 EUR.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

NICvia PDF extraction

Italy (IT)

Via Civita Castellana snc, 01030 Castel Sant'Elia (VT), Italia

Represented by

Nespega & Partners

Holder · RCD owner

Ceramica Cielo S.p.A.via PDF extraction

Italy (IT)

Via Falerina km 7.800, 01034 Fabrica di Roma (Viterbo), Italia

Prior art cited (5)

Web disclosureD1

Incantho line countertop washbasin on angular support frame with side towel rail

https://www.comeristrutturarelacasa.it · comeristrutturarelacasa.it · disclosed 2015-10-20

Web disclosureD2

Incantho line countertop washbasin with basin and towel rail positioned opposite the contested design

https://www.elledecor.com/it · elledecor.com/it · disclosed 2015-10-15

Web disclosureD3

Smaller Incantho line countertop washbasin with centrally placed basin and towel rail

https://www.youtube.com · YouTube video "Cersaie 2015" · disclosed 2015-10-14

Web disclosureD4

Incantho line countertop washbasin shown in different colours at Cersaie 2015

https://www.dostudio.org · dostudio.org / Cersaie 2015

CatalogAnnex 7⚠ rejected as evidence

Incantho 5 washbasin model reproduced in the Globo Incantho 2016 catalog

Globo Incantho 2016 catalog · Globo Incantho 2016 catalog

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying on earlier Incantho washbasin disclosures from 2015 and a 2016 Globo catalog.
  • The holder argued the application was inadmissible or unproven, challenged the reliability of the internet evidence, and maintained the contested design remained novel and individually distinctive.
  • The Division held the specific Annex 7 catalog model was not proven disclosed before 11 April 2016, but accepted D1 to D4 from Annexes 2, 3, 4 and 9 as public disclosures.
  • Comparing the contested design mainly with D1, the Division found visible differences in the basin size, front drawers, open support structure, lack of lower shelf, and absence of a side towel rail.
  • The prior designs did not create the same overall impression on the informed user, so the invalidity application was rejected and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Deciding panel

  • MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberMichele M BENEDETTI - ALOISI

Decision files

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

Locarno classes

23.02

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000125335

vs Digikor Oy

2025-02-11Art 25(1)(b)237
000121854

vs Zhenhua Sun

2024-02-26Art 25(1)(b)237
000120318

vs BIODOM EUROPE S.R.L.

2023-10-10Art 25(1)(b)237
000120199

vs William Huang

2023-05-30Art 25(1)(b)237
000116628

vs DCX POLSKA Sp. z o.o.

2023-01-13Art 25(1)(b)237
000118242

vs TAIZHOU WEIYE REFRIGERATION EQUIPMENT CO.,LTD

2022-11-03Art 25(1)(b)237
000114601

vs fire friends GmbH & Co. KG

2022-03-23Art 25(1)(b)237
000114903

vs CERAMICA CIELO S.p.A.

2022-03-18Art 25(1)(b)237