DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 001466684-0234

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-04-12

000118718

Contested design: 001466684-0234

CDRRCD lapsed at decision

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld; Registered Community design No 001466684-0234 is declared invalid; the holder must bear costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text(de)

1. Dem Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung wird stattgegeben. 2. Das eingetragene Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmuster Nr. 001466684-0234 wird für nichtig erklärt. 3. Die Inhaberin trägt die Kosten, die auf 750 EUR festgesetzt werden.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Glückschuh GmbHvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Heisterbacher Str. 55-57, 53639 Königswinter

Holder · RCD owner

Rieker Schuh AG

Switzerland (CH)

Stockwiesenstr. 1, 8240 Thayngen, Schweiz

Prior art cited (1)

Unregistered CDAS7/AS8

shoe model shown in the product sheet and February/March 2017 orders

Art. 10211 · applicant product sheet and orders · disclosed 2017-02-15

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 novelty and individual character, relying on earlier designs and its own earlier unregistered shoe model evidenced by a product sheet and February/March 2017 orders.
  • The holder argued the application was unfounded, disputed disclosure of the applicant’s unregistered design, and said the cited designs generally created different overall impressions.
  • The Division found the applicant had a legitimate interest despite the holder’s surrender, accepted disclosure of the applicant’s earlier design before the filing date, and considered designer freedom for footwear to be broad.
  • Comparing the contested design with the applicant’s AS7 design, the Division found only minor differences and the same overall impression on the informed user, so the contested design lacked individual character and was invalidated.

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

02.04

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000132104

vs Shenzhen Damai Network Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-05-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000127579

vs VICTORIA CARLOTA TERCEÑO JIMENEZ

2026-04-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000131324

vs Song Li

2026-03-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130815

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130769

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130811

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130812

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130814

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028