DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008795447-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2024-05-10

000121058

Contested design: 008795447-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holders 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 008795447-0001 is declared invalid. 3. The holders bear the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Activeshop Sp. Z o.o.via PDF extraction

Poland (PL)

Graniczna 8B DC2A, 54610 Wrocław, Poland

Represented by

Agnieszka Byra

Holder · RCD owner

Piotr Malinowski

Poland (PL)

ul. Piotrkowska 270, 90361 Łódź, Poland

Represented by

Maria Przybylska-Karczemska

Prior art cited (2)

Web disclosure

nail milling machine

https://allegro.pl/oferta/frezarka-sprint-48-srebrna-13068494268 · allegro.pl · disclosed 2021-04-04

Web disclosure⚠ rejected as evidence

Sprint 40 model nail milling machine

YouTube · disclosed 2019-01-22

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • Applicant argued the contested nail milling machine lacked novelty and individual character over earlier market disclosures and differed only in immaterial details.
  • Holders disputed public disclosure, said the prior design images were insufficiently visible, argued functional constraints limited design freedom, and pointed to shape and vent differences.
  • The Division accepted the Allegro offer as an internet disclosure before 13 December 2021 and rejected the later Sprint 40 evidence as an inadmissible new prior design.
  • It found the shared shape, proportions, and arrangement of components outweighed minor colour and detail differences, so the contested design lacked individual character.
  • The invalidity application was upheld, the contested design was declared invalid, and the holders were ordered to pay EUR 750 in costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberChiara BORACE
  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ

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

13.02

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000129383

vs Wenzhou Haotian Electric Co., Ltd.

2026-03-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)138
000129363

vs Wenzhou Haotian Electric Co., Ltd.

2026-03-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)138
000131764

vs Dongguan Penghui New Energy Technology Co., Ltd

2026-03-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)138
000129921

vs SHENZHEN EASTKING TECHNOLOGY CO.,LTD

2026-03-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)138
000131186

vs Electronic Way Technology Co.,Ltd

2026-03-09REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)138
000128636

vs Guangzhou Quemou Trading Co., Ltd.

2026-02-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)138
000128598

vs Guangzhou Quemou Trading Co., Ltd.

2026-02-17REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)138
000129221

vs Shenzhen Guangtuo Da Lighting Co., LTD

2026-01-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)138