DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003013796-0012

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-04-08

000113981

Contested design: 003013796-0012

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must pay the holder’s fixed costs of EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 0030137960012 is rejected. 2. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Sportstech Brands Holding GmbHvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Potsdamer Platz 11, 10785 Berlin, Germany

Represented by

Lexea Rechtsanwälte

Holder · RCD owner

Hangzhou Chic Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd

China (CN)

No.6 Building, 3rd Floor, Liangzhu University Keji Garden, Liangzhu Street, Yuhang District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province 310000, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

Forresters

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCD

electric scooter

RCD No 0027179750001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2015-07-16

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • Applicant sought invalidity for lack of individual character over earlier RCD No 0027179750001 for an electric scooter.
  • Holder argued the earlier RCD derived from its own earlier design history and that the contested design had materially different protected features.
  • The Division treated the applicant’s earlier RCD as disclosed but focused the comparison on protected features, excluding broken-line details and colour.
  • It found differences in the footpads, mudguards, side views and underside sufficient to create a different overall impression, so the application failed.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila CELISOVA
  • MemberIvanka IVANOVA
  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO

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

12.11

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000104359

vs Lohia e-mobility GmbH

2020-06-23Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)128
000107759

vs A & F S.r.l.

2020-06-10Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)128
000107760

vs A & F S.r.l.

2020-06-04Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)128
000103799

vs LT Fördertechnik

2019-11-04Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)128
000102599

vs Tecnimoem Care, S.L.

2019-10-10Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)128
000103619

vs Airwheel Europe S. A.

2019-09-17Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)128
000011186

vs LA MARE Spółka z o.o.

2019-08-05Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)128
000104299

vs Milan Bříštěla

2019-07-29Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)128