DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 007537964-0013

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-10-06

000115430

Contested design: 007537964-0013

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 007537964-0013 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

Guangdong Qman Toys Industry Co.,Ltdvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

Intersection of West Side of Xingye West 2nd Road and North Side of Xingye South Road, Laimei Industrial Zone, Chenghai District, Shantou, Guangdong 515000, China

Represented by

Von Bülow & Tamada

Holder · RCD owner

Lego A/S

Denmark (DK)

Aastvej 1, 7190 Billund, Denmark

Represented by

Bomhard IP, S.L.

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosure

Brick 22885, Modified 1 x 2 x 1 2/3 with Studs on Side

www.bricklink.com · BrickLink

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 6(1)Article 7(1)Article 8(1)Article 8(2)Article 8(3)

Argument summary

  • The applicant claimed the contested toy brick lacked individual character over an earlier BrickLink-disclosed brick and that its features were dictated solely by technical function.
  • The holder argued the brick's proportions, smooth surfaces and role in a modular construction reflected aesthetic choices, and that Article 8(3) CDR protected modular-system designs.
  • The Division held the product served modular interconnection, so Article 8(3) prevented invalidation based on the asserted technical interconnection features under Article 8.
  • It also found the prior brick created a different overall impression because the contested design had additional studs, a cavity and other visible differences.
  • The application was rejected in full, and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila CELISOVA
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES
  • MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENĖ

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

21.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000128896

vs Sc Pitikot Store Srl

2025-08-18Art 25(1)(b)217
000124438

vs АУТДОР ПЛЕЙ

2025-04-03Art 25(1)(b)217
000126927

vs Jiujiang Storm E-Commerce Co., Ltd.

2025-03-25Art 25(1)(b)217
000121616

vs nano Vo Sp. z o.o.

2024-05-29Art 25(1)(b)217
000121617

vs nano Vo Sp. z o.o.

2024-05-29Art 25(1)(b)217
000121615

vs nano Vo Sp. z o.o.

2024-05-10Art 25(1)(b)217
000114244

vs UTILIS

2024-01-09Art 25(1)(b)217
000121427

vs Jinhua Baiwei Plastic Products Co., Ltd.

2023-11-15Art 25(1)(b)217