DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 007371646-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-10-26

000117793

Contested design: 007371646-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 007371646-0001 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Paaschburg & Wunderlich GmbHvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Am Alten Lokschuppen 10a, 21509 Glinde Germany

Represented by

Olaf E. Wirth

Holder · RCD owner

Guangzhou Xiangtai Vehicle Industry Co,LTDvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

C Workshop Dafutian Chengjiao Street Conghua, Guangzhou City, 510920 Guangdong Province, China

Represented by

Nextmarq

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCD

rearview mirror

RCD No 001730391-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2010-07-22

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • Applicant sought invalidity because the contested rearview-mirror design lacked novelty and individual character in light of earlier designs, especially RCD No 001730391-0001.
  • Holder filed no observations in response to the invalidity application.
  • The Division found Article 25(1)(d) CDR inapplicable because the cited earlier RCD had been disclosed before, not after, the contested filing date.
  • Comparing the designs under Article 6(1)(b) CDR, the Division held that their similarities in shape, proportions, and attachment features outweighed minor differences such as colour.
  • The application was upheld because the contested design lacked individual character and was declared invalid in full, with costs awarded against the holder.

Deciding panel

  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
  • MemberBenjamin VAN BAVEL

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

12.16

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000117735

vs GUANGZHOU XIANGTAI VEHICLE INDUSTRY CO,LTD

2022-10-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b)1210
000117792

vs GUANGZHOU XIANGTAI VEHICLE INDUSTRY CO,LTD

2022-10-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b)1210
000102200

vs MASSAG UK LTD

2019-09-03REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b)1210
000124336

vs Radosław Pryba

2026-05-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)128
000128979

vs Robu Aktiengesellschaft

2026-04-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)128
000129039

vs Robu Aktiengesellschaft

2026-04-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)128
000129038

vs Robu Aktiengesellschaft

2026-04-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)128
000129075

vs Robu Aktiengesellschaft

2026-04-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)128