DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008183404-0004

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-03-09

000116748

Contested design: 008183404-0004

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay EUR 750 in costs.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 008183404-0004 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Miaoping Wangvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

No.172, Chaoxinli, Chaolaigang Village, Guangtai Town, Puning City, Guangdong Province, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

Tong Yang Slu

Holder · RCD owner

Hua Hang Yun Supply Chain (Hongkong) Co., Limitedvia PDF extraction

Hong Kong (HK)

Room 605, 6/f, Fa Yuen Commercial Building, 75-77 Fa Yuen Street, Mongkok, Kowloon, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China

Represented by

Ákos Süle

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureAnnex 1

PELLOR Wood Swing Seat Outdoor Garden swing

https://www.amazon.co.uk/PELLOR-Wood-Swing-Outdoor-Adults/dp/B085B71P3H?ref_=ast_sto_dp · www.amazon.co.uk · disclosed 2018-07-20

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that the contested swing lacked novelty and individual character because an almost identical swing had been offered on Amazon before the filing date.
  • The holder filed no observations and did not contest disclosure or the applicant’s comparison of the designs.
  • The Invalidity Division accepted the Amazon printout and linked images as proof of disclosure under Article 7(1) and found the compared swings differed only in immaterial details.
  • The Division concluded that the contested design lacked novelty under Article 5 and declared it invalid in full.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila CELISOVA
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES
  • MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENE

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

21.03

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