Invalidity · first instance · 2024-01-15
000121099
Contested design: 015004754-0001
Outcome
The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must pay the holder's fixed costs of EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text
The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 015004754-0001 is rejected. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Prior art cited (5)
partly assembled prototype of a telephone booth
applicant's premises in Tilburg, Netherlands · disclosed 2019-12-12
fully assembled telephone booth prototype displayed by the parties
applicant's showroom in Tilburg and holder's office in De Meern, Netherlands · disclosed 2020-06-16
'Evävaara Design' for video-conferencing booths, miniature buildings [other than toys], booths, cubicles, telephone boxes
RCD No 002772418-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2015-09-28
'Otto Design' soundproof office pod
https://tup.works; www.DesignNest.com · DesignNest.com · disclosed 2020-10-27
technical instructions in drawings for the 'Otto Design'
www.DesignNest.com · DesignNest.com
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued that the contested telephone-booth design lacked novelty and individual character over its own earlier prototype disclosures, an earlier RCD, and the Otto office-pod disclosures online.
- ›The holder disputed any qualifying public disclosure before filing, invoked confidentiality and limited public access, and argued that the cited booths created different overall impressions.
- ›The Division accepted disclosure of D2, D3 and D4, but not D1 or D5, and found the cited designs materially different from the contested design in colour, outline, wall structure, borders and front wall.
- ›The invalidity grounds under Article 25(1)(b) CDR failed, so the application was rejected and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
- MemberElisabetta FERRARO
- MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
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
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000128596 vs Griptel AB | 2025-07-17 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000124436 vs Ziel Home Furnishing Technology Co., Ltd. | 2024-11-19 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000121138 vs TABB Interior Systems B.V. | 2024-01-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000121100 vs TABB Interior Systems B.V. | 2024-01-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000120379 vs Ergosafe Aktiebolag | 2023-10-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000120958 vs Yimei Zhu | 2023-07-27 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000119859 vs BoZarc | 2023-06-02 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000117077 vs Budotechnika Sp. o.o. | 2022-12-13 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |