Invalidity · first instance · 2022-09-05
000116208
Contested design: 008025852-0001
Outcome
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 0080258520001 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
PTM Guard, SIAvia PDF extraction
LV
Kārļa Ulmaņa gatve 2A, 1004 Rīga, Latvia
Represented by
Olga Vahatova
Holder · RCD owner
Rongxing Jiangvia PDF extraction
China (CN)
No. 28 Liyangxin Road, Nanhui Committee, Lucheng District, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China
Represented by
Alberto Maria Giordano
Prior art cited (3)
massage element for acupressure products
RCD No 0015526050001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2009-07-27
massage element for acupressure products
RCD No 0015526050002 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2009-07-27
massage element for acupressure products
RCD No 0015526050003 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2009-07-27
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of individual character over earlier RCDs No 0015526050001, No 0015526050002 and No 0015526050003.
- ›The holder argued the design corpus was saturated with lotus-flower acupressure elements, designer freedom was limited, and the contested design differed in cut-outs, protuberances and underside pattern.
- ›The Division accepted disclosure of earlier RCD No 0015526050002, found the Bing image search insufficient to prove market saturation, and held designer freedom for massage elements was broad.
- ›The shared lotus-flower shape and concentric protuberance arrangement outweighed minor differences, so the contested design lacked individual character and was declared invalid.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
- MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENĖ
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000130164 vs Moritz Neugebauer | 2026-05-22 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 28 | 8 |
| 000129241 vs Yi Wing Global Limited | 2026-05-12 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 28 | 8 |
| 000132044 vs Xucan XU | 2026-05-08 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 28 | 8 |
| 000131244 vs Shenzhen Lumei E-commerce Co., Ltd. | 2026-03-27 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 28 | 8 |
| 000130964 vs Changde Yameixun Network Technology Co., Ltd. | 2026-02-06 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 28 | 8 |
| 000130541 vs Medintim SL | 2025-12-23 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 28 | 8 |
| 000128396 vs Koninklijke Philips N.V. | 2025-12-15 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 28 | 8 |
| 000128638 vs Xiaoyan Kang | 2025-12-10 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 28 | 8 |