DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008818637-0006

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-10-03

000118060

Contested design: 008818637-0006

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

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 0088186370006 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

Liviu Chertesvia PDF extraction

Romania (RO)

Sat Feleacu (Com. Feleacu), Cluj-Napoca, Jud. Cluj, Cluj-Napoca, Romania

Holder · RCD owner

Label Print SRLvia PDF extraction

Romania (RO)

B-dul Banu Manta, Nr.21, Bl.35, Sc.B, Et.5, Ap.70, Sector 1, Bucuresti, Romania

Represented by

Elena Grecu

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCD

set of seven food/product labels with coloured weekday headings

RCD No 0063496270001 · EUIPO RCD registration · disclosed 2019-04-10

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • Applicant sought invalidity under Articles 25(1)(b) and 25(1)(d) CDR based on earlier RCD No 0063496270001 and argued the contested weekday tag lacked novelty and individual character.
  • Holder argued Article 25(1)(d) was unavailable because the earlier design had been published before the contested filing date, and denied identity or the same overall impression under Article 25(1)(b).
  • The Division accepted the applicant's belated reasoning into the record but held Article 25(1)(d) inapplicable because the earlier RCD had already been published before the contested design was filed.
  • On novelty and individual character, the Division assessed the contested tag as registered, refused to reconstruct undisclosed prior-tag variants, found clear differences in format, colours, layout and fonts, and rejected the application.

Deciding panel

  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberLudmila CELISOVA
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES

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

19.08

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000118059

vs LABEL PRINT SRL

2022-10-04Art 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b)199
000118058

vs LABEL PRINT SRL

2022-10-04Art 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b)199
000118039

vs LABEL PRINT SRL

2022-10-03Art 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b)199
000129182

vs Guangzhou L-TEK Enterprise Co.,Ltd

2025-09-25Art 25(1)(b)197
000124996

vs Shenzhen Dingzhen Technology Co., Ltd.

2024-07-24Art 25(1)(b)197
000118057

vs LABEL PRINT SRL

2022-10-04Art 25(1)(d)197
000118037

vs LABEL PRINT SRL

2022-10-04Art 25(1)(d)197
000118038

vs LABEL PRINT SRL

2022-10-03Art 25(1)(d)197