DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008669915-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-06-29

000120099

Contested design: 008669915-0002

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

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

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 008669915-0002 is rejected. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Zhongshan Jingzhimei Caster Manufacturing Co., Ltd.via PDF extraction

China (CN)

No. 32, Lianhe Street, Xiaolan Town, Zhongshan, Guangdong Province 528400 China

Holder · RCD owner

Changquan Zhu

China (CN)

15th Floor, Building S7, Yantian Tian'an Digital City, Fenggang Town, Dongguan City, Guangdong China

Represented by

Marinos Cleanthous

Prior art cited (4)

Web disclosureD1⚠ rejected as evidence

CASTOR design

ASIN B08LYCXXLJ · Amazon (amazon.de) · disclosed 2020-10-26

Web disclosureD2⚠ rejected as evidence

Scghwenkbare Gummirollen fur Kinderbetter design

ASIN B08X4QZYPD · Amazon (amazon.de) · disclosed 2021-02-22

Web disclosureD3⚠ rejected as evidence

NMDCDH Mobbelrollen design

ASIN B094ZNZV09 · Amazon (amazon.de) · disclosed 2021-05-15

Web disclosureD4⚠ rejected as evidence

U-Type Bracket, Furniture Castor design

ASIN B09J3P4X5K · Amazon (amazon.de) · disclosed 2021-07-22

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity under Articles 25(1)(b), 4(1), 5(1)(b) and 6(1)(b) CDR, alleging the caster design directly imitated four earlier designs.
  • It relied on Amazon printouts for D1 to D4 and asserted disclosure dates between 26 October 2020 and 22 July 2021.
  • The holder was invited to respond but filed no observations.
  • The Division found the evidence did not objectively prove when the alleged prior designs were made available to the public under Article 7(1) CDR.
  • Because prior disclosure was not established, the novelty and individual-character attack failed; the application was rejected and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Deciding panel

  • MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES
  • 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

06.06

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