DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008639785-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-01-05

000117088

Contested design: 008639785-0001

CDRmedium-confidence extraction

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

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

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 008639785-0001 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Ricegrowers Limitedvia PDF extraction

AU

Yanco Avenue, Leeton, New South Wales 2705, Australia

Holder · RCD owner

’Глобал Райс’ Еоодvia PDF extraction

Bulgaria (BG)

район Възраждане, ул. Царибродска № 144, ет. 3, ап. 6, 1309 София, Bulgaria

Represented by

Hristo Plamenov Raychev

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCDAnnex 1

rice bag packaging with a plate of rice, vegetables and meat

Community design registration No 006620837-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2019-07-15

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of individual character, relying on an earlier rice-bag design disclosed before the filing date.
  • The holder argued the back view, banal shared packaging features, and regulatory and market constraints created a different overall impression and limited designer freedom.
  • The Division found the earlier design was disclosed, the designer retained broad freedom, and the front views were almost identical in layout, imagery, decorations, and colours.
  • Differences in transparency, colour vividness, and the unsubmitted prior back view did not alter the overall impression; the contested design lacked individual character.
  • The invalidity application was upheld, the contested design was declared invalid, and costs were awarded against the holder.

Deciding panel

  • MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ

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

09.05

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131325

vs HaoJun Zhu

2026-05-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000131965

vs Jiaxing Xiaotian Environmental Protection Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-05-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000130985

vs Suzhou Hongmao Import & Export Trade Co.,Ltd

2026-03-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000130944

vs Shenzhen Tajinxuan Trading Co.,Ltd.

2026-02-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000130968

vs Shenzhen Zhimei Chuangke E-commerce Co., Ltd.

2026-02-05REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000129539

vs MOHAMAR JAMOU

2026-01-14REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000130088

vs Mindful eCom OÜ

2025-12-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098
000129281

vs VERONIKI ECOGRUP SRL

2025-11-04REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)098