DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 007907175-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-02-23

000117372

Contested design: 007907175-0001

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected and the applicant must pay the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 0079071750001 is rejected. 2. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Joanna Rafalskavia PDF extraction

Poland (PL)

ul. Gen. Władysława Sikorskiego 26/64, 40282 Katowice, Poland

Holder · RCD owner

Biovico Sp. z o.o.

Poland (PL)

Hutnicza 15B, 81061 Gdynia, Poland

Represented by

Małgorzata Matyka

Prior art cited (1)

Prior use

Chondrectom parallel 30°, part of a surgical instrument for chondrectomy

BS 010.30 · Applicant invoices and brochure · disclosed 2019-03-06

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5(1)(b)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7

Argument summary

  • The applicant claimed the contested surgical-instrument tip lacked novelty and individual character over her earlier Chondrectom parallel product disclosed through sales, a brochure, and the Arab Health 2020 fair.
  • The holder argued the relied-on disclosures were excluded or unproven, the invoices showed only sample offers, and the contested design remained distinct within a technically constrained sector.
  • The Division accepted that the prior design had been disclosed before filing by combining invoices with the brochure, but found the informed user would notice the materially different bend angle of the tip.
  • Because the contested design created a different overall impression and the differences were not immaterial, the invalidity application failed on individual character and novelty grounds.

Deciding panel

  • MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • 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

24.02

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000117392

vs CILAG GMBH INTERNATIONAL

2023-05-15Art 25(1)(b)247
000118097

vs CILAG GMBH INTERNATIONAL

2023-05-15Art 25(1)(b)247
000118077

vs CILAG GMBH INTERNATIONAL

2023-03-22Art 25(1)(b)247
000117453

vs SHANGHAI TENGXIANG TRAVEL PRODUCTS CO.,LTD

2023-03-20Art 25(1)(b)247
000115342

vs Elsa Vermögens- und Beteiligungs AG

2022-06-15Art 25(1)(b)247
000108861

vs Sofiane Lozano IBANEZ

2021-07-22Art 25(1)(b)247
000107461

vs CHANGCHUN XIA

2020-05-08Art 25(1)(b)247
000105480

vs FBGC Limited

2019-08-13Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)247