DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 004031201-0004

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-11-17

000117612

Contested design: 004031201-0004

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The application for a declaration of invalidity is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text(de)

1. Der Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung des eingetragenen Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmusters Nr. 004031201-0004 wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten der Inhaberin, die auf 400 EUR festgesetzt werden.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

B.K.Licht GmbH & Co. KGvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Herzog Johann Str. 4 a, 81245 München, Deutschland

Holder · RCD owner

DecoTrend GmbH

Germany (DE)

zur Drehscheibe 5, 92637 Weiden, Deutschland

Prior art cited (2)

PatentAnlage 2

flachlegbarer Illuminationsstern

Swiss Patent No. 132939 · Swiss Patent Office · disclosed 1929-07-16

PatentAnlage 4

foldable lantern

US Patent No. 1,653,206 · United States Patent Office · disclosed 1927-12-20

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that the contested Christmas star design lacked individual character in light of earlier Swiss and US patent disclosures showing the same overall star appearance.
  • The holder replied that the cited patents disclosed a foldable Annaberg star with materially different geometry, beam shapes, and construction, and that the contested design was a different star design.
  • The Division accepted both patent publications as prior disclosures under Article 7(1) but found that their common star concept carried limited weight because such outward-pointing rays are typical for Christmas stars.
  • It held that the earlier foldable stars created a clearly different overall impression, especially in the shape of the rays, so the invalidity ground failed and the application was rejected.

Deciding panel

  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberIvanka IVANOVA
  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
deGermanoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

26.0426.05

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000119619

vs XAL GmbH

2026-04-15Art 25(1)(b)267
000119620

vs XAL GmbH

2026-04-15Art 25(1)(b)267
000119599

vs XAL GmbH

2026-04-15Art 25(1)(b)267
000131624

vs NOVOWISE LTD

2026-03-27Art 25(1)(b)267
000130242

vs DMUSEUM Inc.

2026-03-05Art 25(1)(b)267
000130762

vs TURISPORT, S.L.

2026-02-24Art 25(1)(b)267
000127916

vs Volvo Car Corporation

2026-02-11Art 25(1)(b)267
000128875

vs YUYAO HILITE ELECTRIC CO.,LTD

2025-11-03Art 25(1)(b)267