DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002743963-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-12-22

000121425

Contested design: 002743963-0002

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

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 002743963-0002 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

Abrex System S.r.l.via PDF extraction

Italy (IT)

Via del viticoltore, 11-11/A, 40023 Castel Guelfo (Bologna), Italy

Represented by

Accapi s.r.l.

Holder · RCD owner

Guido Valentini

Italy (IT)

Via Corridoni, 4, 20122 Milano Italy

Represented by

Wörz Patentanwälte PartG mbB

Volker Wörz

Prior art cited (3)

Registered RCDD1

wrenches

Community design registration No 0001798580001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2004-08-24

International designD2

long-neck angle grinder, grinding drill

International design registration No DM/050 389 · International Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2000-03-31

Web disclosureD3

Proxxon grinder shown in a YouTube video

https://www.youtube.com · YouTube · disclosed 2013-03-21

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7(1)Article 5(1)(b)Article 5(2)

Argument summary

  • Applicant sought invalidity for lack of individual character, citing three earlier tool designs and arguing they created a similar overall impression.
  • Holder argued the contested design produced a different overall impression and challenged the reliability of the YouTube disclosure date for D3.
  • The Division accepted disclosure of D1 to D3, including the YouTube video, and found the informed user would perceive significant differences from each prior design.
  • The invoked prior designs also did not destroy novelty, so the invalidity application was rejected in full.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberAlfonso CID GONZÁLEZ
  • MemberEnrico D’ERRICO

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

15.09

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000129421

vs Brain Flash-Patententwicklungs GmbH

2026-05-08Art 25(1)(b)157
000129441

vs Brain Flash-Patententwicklungs GmbH

2026-05-08Art 25(1)(b)157
000129368

vs Brain Flash-Patententwicklungs GmbH

2026-05-06Art 25(1)(b)157
000125799

vs Jiangxi Huawu Brake Co., Ltd.

2024-11-26Art 25(1)(b)157
000125735

vs Jiangxi Huawu Brake Co., Ltd.

2024-11-26Art 25(1)(b)157
000125796

vs Jiangxi Huawu Brake Co., Ltd.

2024-11-26Art 25(1)(b)157
000125777

vs Jiangxi Huawu Brake Co., Ltd.

2024-11-26Art 25(1)(b)157
000114111

vs MASCHIO GASPARDO S.p.A.

2022-01-04Art 25(1)(b)157