DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 007462064-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-05-30

000120199

Contested design: 007462064-0001

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

Hanyong Livia PDF extraction

China (CN)

Room 556, Building A, Technology Park, Economic Development Zone, Suining County Xuzhou, China

Represented by

Nicole Sciberras Debono

Holder · RCD owner

William Huang

China (CN)

1004, No 2, Bldg 50, Lian Tai Xiang Yu Bing Jiang Garden, Hong Gu Tang District Nanchang City, 330008 Jiangxi Province, China

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 25(1)(e)Article 28(1)(b)(vi)Article 52(2)Article 30(1)Article 30(2)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity of Community design No 007462064-0001 under Article 25(1)(b) CDR in conjunction with Article 4(1) CDR and under Article 25(1)(e) CDR.
  • No substantive response from the holder is recorded because the case was decided solely on admissibility.
  • The Division found the application lacked the required reasoned statement of facts, evidence and arguments and that the applicant did not cure that deficiency after invitation.
  • The application was rejected as inadmissible, and the invalidity fee was not refunded.

Deciding panel

  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
  • MemberCarlos MATEO PÉREZ

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

23.03

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000102859

vs Syzan Sp. z o.o.

2019-04-25Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(e)239
000125335

vs Digikor Oy

2025-02-11Art 25(1)(b)237
000121854

vs Zhenhua Sun

2024-02-26Art 25(1)(b)237
000120318

vs BIODOM EUROPE S.R.L.

2023-10-10Art 25(1)(b)237
000116628

vs DCX POLSKA Sp. z o.o.

2023-01-13Art 25(1)(b)237
000118242

vs TAIZHOU WEIYE REFRIGERATION EQUIPMENT CO.,LTD

2022-11-03Art 25(1)(b)237
000114601

vs fire friends GmbH & Co. KG

2022-03-23Art 25(1)(b)237
000114903

vs CERAMICA CIELO S.p.A.

2022-03-18Art 25(1)(b)237