DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002249763-0083

Invalidity · first instance · 2024-04-18

000122294

Contested design: 002249763-0083

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay EUR 750 in costs.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered Community design No 002249763-0083 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Топ Тен EOODvia PDF extraction

Bulgaria (BG)

ul. Zhelezarska no. 9, 4000 Plovdiv, Bulgaria

Represented by

Stoyan Sirakov

Holder · RCD owner

Doors Bulgaria EOODvia PDF extraction

Bulgaria (BG)

j.k. 'Pobeda', bl. 9, floor 2, app. 10, 9000 Varna, Bulgaria

Represented by

Kostadin Manev

Prior art cited (1)

Catalog

Vesta Logistics EOOD brochure excerpt showing an 'MDF DOOR'

Vesta Logistics EOOD promotional brochure · disclosed 2010-05-03

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that the contested door design lacked novelty and individual character over several earlier designs, especially a door shown in a 2010 Vesta Logistics brochure.
  • The holder disputed disclosure, dating, and proof of market availability, and argued that the compared designs created different overall impressions.
  • The Division found the brochure reliably showed prior disclosure before the filing date and that sale to end consumers was unnecessary under Article 7(1) CDR.
  • Given broad design freedom for door fronts, the shared wood-like finish and matching wavy vertical ornamentation created the same overall impression on the informed user.
  • The application was upheld because the contested design lacked individual character, and the holder was ordered to bear the costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberIvanka IVANOVA

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

25.02

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000129804

vs Mirosław Mytnik StudioDelta.pl

2026-05-06REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000129781

vs SHANGHAI KENDA INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD.

2026-02-09REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000126955

vs Decora S.A.

2026-01-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000129761

vs Shanghai Kenda Industrial Co.,Ltd.

2025-11-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000127177

vs Hermanus Johannes Matheus Verdegaal

2025-10-14REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000129361

vs Xiaoxia LI

2025-10-09REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000129266

vs Taiyuan Jiuchangsheng Trading Co., Ltd.

2025-10-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258
000124780

vs D.ELLINAS FACTORY PRODUCTS LTD

2025-06-25REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)258