Invalidity · first instance · 2023-10-20

000121562

Contested design: 001669771-0002

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

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

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 001669771-0002 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

REBOMA trgovina in gradbeništvo, d.o.o.via PDF extraction

Cesarjeva ulica 29, 8000 Novo mesto, Slovenia

Represented by

Jure Marn

Holder · RCD owner

3S SPORT d.o.o.via PDF extraction

Perovo 25, 1240 Kamnik, Slovenia

Represented by

Marjan Pipan

Prior art cited (24)

Patent⚠ rejected as evidence

Chinese patent application for 'a kind of Appliance for storing & taking coins'

CN200520130517 / CN2845035Y · Chinese patent application · disclosed 2005-11-04

Registered RCDD1⚠ rejected as evidence

purse

000624697-0001 · EUIPO register

Registered RCDD2⚠ rejected as evidence

pouch

001044747-0001 · EUIPO register

Registered RCDD3⚠ rejected as evidence

pouch

001044747-0002 · EUIPO register

CatalogD4⚠ rejected as evidence

purse

Beijing Royal Aviation Technology catalogue

National designD5⚠ rejected as evidence

German design

M8908007 · Germany

National designD6⚠ rejected as evidence

German design

M9107706 · Germany

National designD7⚠ rejected as evidence

French design

020961 · France

Web disclosureD8⚠ rejected as evidence

money bag described as 'Vintage from the 1930s'

https://www.etsy.com listing No 1211951216 · Etsy

National designD9⚠ rejected as evidence

coin dispenser

98211 · France

National designD10⚠ rejected as evidence

purse

020473 · France

National designD11⚠ rejected as evidence

coin dispenser

12408 · France

Prior useD12⚠ rejected as evidence

Asoma Oy wallet

Asoma Oy

Web disclosureD13⚠ rejected as evidence

Asoma Oy belt bag

https://shop.asoma.fi/product/3/belt-bag-black · Asoma website

Prior useD14⚠ rejected as evidence

Asoma design

Asoma Oy

Prior useD15⚠ rejected as evidence

wallet allegedly shown at SMAU 2002 in Milan

SMAU trade show / Technoemporiki SA

Prior useD16⚠ rejected as evidence

wallet manufactured by Technoemporiki SA

Technoemporiki SA

Prior useD17⚠ rejected as evidence

wallet allegedly displayed during CeBIT 2003 in Hannover

CeBIT trade show

Prior useD18⚠ rejected as evidence

ATHRISI wallet bag

ATHRISI

Prior useD19⚠ rejected as evidence

ATHRISI wallet bag / coin dispenser

ATHRISI

Prior useD20⚠ rejected as evidence

Fuxia wallet bag

Fuxia

Prior useD21⚠ rejected as evidence

Fuxia wallet bag

Fuxia

Prior useD22⚠ rejected as evidence

SDSP wallet bag

SDSP

Prior useD23⚠ rejected as evidence

SDSP wallet bag

SDSP

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 6(1)Article 7Article 8(1)

Argument summary

›The applicant sought invalidity under Articles 6 and 8(1) CDR, arguing the pouch design was technically dictated and lacked individual character over numerous earlier purse, pouch, coin-dispenser, catalogue, web, and trade-show designs.
›The holder filed no observations in response to the invalidity application.
›On technical function, the Division held the cited Chinese patent did not match the registered appearance and the applicant produced no objective evidence showing the contested design's features were solely function-driven.
›On individual character, the Division found the cited prior designs were not validly disclosed or did not show the same subject matter with sufficient clarity for comparison under Article 7 CDR.
›The application was rejected in full, and the applicant was ordered to pay the holder's fixed costs of EUR 400.

Deciding panel

MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENĖ
MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
MemberIneta GALUBICKE

Decision files

Language	Type	Source link
deDeutsch (de)	machine translated	Download original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)	machine translated	Download original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)	machine translated	Download original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)	machine translated	Download original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglish	original	Download original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

03.01

Similar decisions

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

Case	Date	Outcome	Shared grounds	Locarno	Score
000124157 vs Invented Here B.V.	2025-03-07	—	Art 25(1)(b)	03	7
000124416 vs Wenbo Huang	2025-01-28	—	Art 25(1)(b)	03	7
000121569 vs PANAGIOTIS SPILIOPOULOS	2024-06-12	—	Art 25(1)(b)	03	7
000121529 vs PANAGIOTIS SPILIOPOULOS	2024-05-31	—	Art 25(1)(b)	03	7
000121526 vs PANAGIOTIS SPILIOPOULOS	2024-05-24	—	Art 25(1)(b)	03	7
000121525 vs PANAGIOTIS SPILIOPOULOS	2024-05-24	—	Art 25(1)(b)	03	7
000121568 vs PANAGIOTIS SPILIOPOULOS	2024-05-23	—	Art 25(1)(b)	03	7
000121527 vs PANAGIOTIS SPILIOPOULOS	2024-05-23	—	Art 25(1)(b)	03	7