DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008644918-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-04-27

000117030

Contested design: 008644918-0001

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

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

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 0086449180001 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

Yueer Tanvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

Rm. 1412, Bldg. 1, Qinghu Mingquan, Longhua Dist., Shenzhen 518000 People’s Republic of China

Holder · RCD owner

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

Hong Kong (HK)

Room 605, 6/F, Fa Yuen Commercial Building, 7577 Fa Yuen Street, Mongkok, Kowloon, Hongkong Hong Kong

Represented by

Ákos Süle

Prior art cited (4)

National designD1

bicycle bag

CN 303137839 S · Chinese Industrial Property Office · disclosed 2015-03-25

National designD2

bicycle bag

CN 302246841 S · Chinese Industrial Property Office · disclosed 2012-12-26

National designD3

bicycle bag

CN 302246840 S · Chinese Industrial Property Office · disclosed 2012-12-26

Registered RCDD4

bike bags

RCD No 0021685910016 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2013-02-21

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5(1)(b)Article 5(2)Article 6(1)(b)Article 6(2)Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character over three earlier Chinese design registrations and one earlier RCD for bicycle bags.
  • The holder filed no observations in response to the invalidity application.
  • The Invalidity Division accepted disclosure of D1 to D4 but found the shared portal-shaped configuration banal and gave more weight to differing bag shape, pockets, zips, cords, straps, and stitching.
  • Because those differences changed the overall impression and were not immaterial, the contested design had individual character and novelty over each prior design.
  • The invalidity application was rejected and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in representation costs.

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

03.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131964

vs Shenzhen Debaisite Trading Co., Ltd.

2026-04-22REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)037
000129304

vs APRIMONIA Ltd.

2026-03-25REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)037
000130547

vs Rong Hua

2026-02-23REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)037
000130887

vs Suqi Zhuang

2026-02-05REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)037
000130221

vs WITTCHEN S.A.

2025-12-17REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)037
000130241

vs WITTCHEN S.A.

2025-12-16REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)037
000130204

vs WITTCHEN S.A.

2025-12-16REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)037
000130142

vs Edita Avakian

2025-12-03REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)037