Invalidity · first instance · 2022-12-21
000117382
Contested design: 008044010-0001
Outcome
The invalidity application against registered Community design No 008044010-0001 is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text(fr)
1. La demande en nullité à l’encontre du dessin ou modèle communautaire enregistré nº 008044010-0001 est rejetée. 2. La demanderesse supporte les frais de la titulaire, fixés à 400 EUR.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Vaisala France SASvia PDF extraction
France (FR)
43 rue de Liège, 75008 Paris, France
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
B.R.C 77 (Baie Rack Container) Société par actions simplifiée à associé uniquevia PDF extraction
France (FR)
route de Sainte-Poix, 35370 Le Pertre, France
Represented by
Prior art cited (6)
Applicant's Windcube product information sheet
Windcube · Vaisala France
Applicant's Windcube brochure
Windcube brochure · Vaisala France
Installation report for a Windcube product in Japan
Windcube installation report (Japan) · Vaisala France
Installation report for a Windcube product in Chile
Windcube installation report (Chile) · Vaisala France
Installation report for a Windcube product in Belgium
Windcube installation report (Belgium) · Vaisala France · disclosed 2019-05-16
Technical specifications for the Windcube v2 housing
Spécifications Techniques du Besoin – Caisson Windcube v2 · Vaisala France
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character and argued that the contested housing's features were exclusively dictated by technical function.
- ›The holder replied that the cited Windcube materials were the applicant's own documents, were not proven public disclosures, and did not establish either invalidity ground.
- ›The Division found no objective, corroborated evidence that the alleged prior Windcube design had been made available to the public under Article 7(1).
- ›The Division also held that the container's external form was not exclusively dictated by technical function because other overall forms were possible.
- ›The invalidity application was rejected in full and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila CELISOVA
- MemberJessica N. LEWIS
- MemberCarmen SÁNCHEZ PALOMARES
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frFrench | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000129508 vs Messerle GmbH | 2026-04-23 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000129522 vs Messerle GmbH | 2026-04-14 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000127995 vs Jaroslav Masopust | 2026-02-06 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000129516 vs MOHAMAR JAMOU | 2026-01-14 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000128115 vs GREEN TEAM EUROPE A/S | 2025-11-20 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000123774 vs Gusta Garden GmbH | 2024-11-06 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000123875 vs Multiple Products B.V. | 2024-10-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |
| 000124459 vs Gusta Garden GmbH | 2024-10-04 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 09 | 7 |