DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 007203252-0003

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-05-31

000114483

Contested design: 007203252-0003

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 007203252-0003 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Apple Inc.via PDF extraction

United States (US)

One Apple Park Way, Cupertino, California 95014, United States

Holder · RCD owner

Guangzhou Xuanxin Electronic Technology Co., Ltd.

China (CN)

A101, 2F, No.38, Shengtang St. Industrial Zone, Cen Village, Tianhe Dist., Guangzhou City, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

METIDA

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureD1

Apple Watch smartwatch

https://www.apple.com/de · apple.com/de via Internet Archive and TinEye · disclosed 2018-09-14

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 novelty and individual character, relying on prior Apple Watch disclosures on apple.com before the filing date.
  • Holder disputed disclosure in the EU, argued smartwatch design freedom was limited, and pointed to strap colour and attachment differences.
  • The Division found the archived German Apple website and related screenshot proved disclosure under Article 7(1) CDR before filing.
  • It held the designer had broad freedom and that the shared smartwatch shape and features outweighed minor strap differences.
  • The application was upheld because the contested design lacked individual character and the holder was ordered to pay costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila CELISOVA
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES
  • MemberMichelle Marie DELLACHERIE

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

10.02

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130161

vs ALBOR BOGDAN NIEDBAŁA

2026-01-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000130127

vs ALBOR BOGDAN NIEDBAŁA

2026-01-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000127515

vs Changzhou Fengxue Network Technology Co., Ltd.

2025-06-10REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
0001274582025-04-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000123375

vs Gongjue Brand management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd.

2025-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000123394

vs Gongjue Brand management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd.

2025-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000123374

vs Gongjue Brand management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd.

2025-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108
000123355

vs Gongjue Brand management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd.

2025-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)108