Invalidity · first instance · 2022-05-25
000116207
Contested design: 008465249-0001
Outcome
The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must bear 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 008465249-0001 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
Damian Peca Impaktvia PDF extraction
Poland (PL)
Warzywna 18, 42-208 Częstochowa, Poland
Holder · RCD owner
Zakład Produkcyjno- Handlowo-Usługowy „Formes Toys’ mgr inż. Grzegorz Chudyvia PDF extraction
Poland (PL)
ul. Śląska 69, 42-130 Wręczyca Wielka, Poland
Prior art cited (10)
lantern
Polish design registration No 26188 · Polish Patent Office · disclosed 2020-08-24
lantern
Polish design registration No 26188 · Polish Patent Office · disclosed 2020-08-24
lantern
Polish design registration No 26188 · Polish Patent Office · disclosed 2020-08-24
lantern
Polish design registration No 26188 · Polish Patent Office · disclosed 2020-08-24
lantern
Polish design registration No 26563 · Polish Patent Office · disclosed 2020-12-28
lantern
Polish design application No 29100 · Polish Patent Office
lantern
Polish design application No 29656 · Polish Patent Office
lantern
Polish design application No 29657 · Polish Patent Office
lantern
Polish design application No 29658 · Polish Patent Office
lantern
Polish design application No 29289 · Polish Patent Office
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›Applicant alleged lack of novelty and individual character, conflict with earlier Polish design rights, and unauthorized use of copyrighted lantern features, and also invoked bad-faith filing.
- ›Holder filed observations out of time and sought restitutio in integrum, but the request was refused and the observations were not taken into consideration.
- ›The Division accepted disclosure only for Polish designs D1 to D5, found D6 to D10 unproved as disclosures, and held the contested lantern created a different overall impression and was not identical.
- ›The copyright ground failed because the applicant did not prove the relevant Polish copyright law or protected originality of the claimed features; the invalidity application was rejected.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
- MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL
- MemberElisabetta FERRARO
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Locarno classes
Similar decisions
Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.
| Case | Date | Outcome | Shared grounds | Locarno | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000127916 vs Volvo Car Corporation | 2026-02-11 | — | Art 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(f) | 26 | 11 |
| 000125398 vs Nan Zheng | 2024-08-28 | — | Art 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 9 |
| 000130205 vs MHS IMPORT EXPORT Sp. z o.o. | 2026-05-08 | — | Art 25(1)(f) | 26 | 7 |
| 000119599 vs XAL GmbH | 2026-04-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |
| 000119619 vs XAL GmbH | 2026-04-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |
| 000119620 vs XAL GmbH | 2026-04-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |
| 000131624 vs NOVOWISE LTD | 2026-03-27 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |
| 000130242 vs DMUSEUM Inc. | 2026-03-05 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 26 | 7 |