DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008443980-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-04-08

000115725

Contested design: 008443980-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must bear costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 0084439800001 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Crocs, Inc.via PDF extraction

United States (US)

13601 Via Varra, Broomfield Colorado 80020, United States of America

Represented by

Fieldfisher LLP

Holder · RCD owner

FLAMEshoes, s.r.o.

SK

Kružlov 292, 08604 Kružlov, Slovakia

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCD

beach shoes

RCD No 0026622880002 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2015-03-30

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying on earlier RCD No 0026622880002 for beach shoes.
  • The holder invoked arguments from separate litigation concerning RCD No 0002570010001; after the applicant replied, the holder filed no further observations.
  • The Division accepted publication of the earlier RCD in the Community Designs Bulletin as sufficient disclosure under Article 7(1) CDR.
  • Comparing only disclosed features, the Division found the designs materially identical and any graphics or colour-shade differences immaterial, so novelty was absent.
  • The application was upheld on Article 25(1)(b) in conjunction with Articles 4(1) and 5(1)(b) CDR, making examination of Article 6(1)(b) unnecessary.

Deciding panel

  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
  • MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI - ALOISI

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

02.04

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000132104

vs Shenzhen Damai Network Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-05-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000127579

vs VICTORIA CARLOTA TERCEÑO JIMENEZ

2026-04-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000131324

vs Song Li

2026-03-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130815

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130769

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130811

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130812

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130814

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028