DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008182497-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-01-23

000119401

Contested design: 008182497-0001

CDR

Outcome

Application inadmissible

The invalidity application is rejected as inadmissible, and the invalidity fee will not be refunded.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is rejected as inadmissible. 2. The fee for the application for a declaration of invalidity will not be refunded.

CostsNo costs order

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Jeel Online GmbHvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Linsellesstraße 142, 47877 Willich, Germany

Represented by

Jan Heidicker

Holder · RCD owner

Guiju Fan

China (CN)

5th Floor, Building 612, No. 12, Bagua 2nd Road, Futian District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, Shenzhen, China

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 98(4)Article 30(1)Article 28(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity of Community design No 008182497-0001 under Article 25(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 4(1) CDR.
  • The holder filed no observations and no defence is recorded in the decision.
  • The Division found the reasoned statement was filed in German instead of the language of proceedings, English, contrary to Article 98(4) CDR.
  • After the Office invited the applicant to remedy the deficiency and it did not do so in time, the application was held inadmissible under Article 30(1) CDIR.
  • The invalidity application was rejected as inadmissible and the filing fee was not refunded.

Deciding panel

  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES

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

06.13

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000127357

vs ED-Lifestyle Polstermöbel GmbH & Co. KG

2025-02-13Art 25(1)(b)067
000127356

vs ED-Lifestyle Polstermöbel GmbH & Co. KG

2025-02-12Art 25(1)(b)067
000127340

vs ED-Lifestyle Polstermöbel GmbH & Co. KG

2025-02-06Art 25(1)(b)067
000121199

vs MANUTTI BVBA

2024-05-16Art 25(1)(b)067
000120918

vs Sergiy Fatkulayev

2024-03-27Art 25(1)(b)067
000120869

vs Sergiy Fatkulayev

2024-03-27Art 25(1)(b)067
000120920

vs Sergiy Fatkulayev

2024-03-27Art 25(1)(b)067
000120919

vs Sergiy Fatkulayev

2024-03-27Art 25(1)(b)067