DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 005299211-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2024-05-23

000121567

Contested design: 005299211-0002

CDRmedium-confidence extraction

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The application for a declaration of invalidity of Registered Community Design No 005299211-0002 is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text(es)

1. Se desestima la solicitud de declaración de nulidad del modelo comunitario registrado n.º 005299211-0002. 2. Se condena al solicitante a que sufrague las costas del titular, fijadas en 400 EUR.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Citron Trading LLCvia PDF extraction

AE

Al Shafar Building 1, Jumeirah Street, 2ª office 03, Dubai 927423, Emiratos Árabes Unidos

Represented by

Bird & Bird LLP

Holder · RCD owner

Panagiotis Spiliopoulosvia PDF extraction

GR

5 Roumelis str., 18345 Moschato, Grecia

Represented by

Ioannis Psarakis

Prior art cited (10)

Registered RCDD1

bag design owned by the holder

RCD No 004505576-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2017-11-16

Web disclosureD2⚠ rejected as evidence

JanSport bag design cited in Annex 1

Amazon / unidentified website

Web disclosureD3⚠ rejected as evidence

bag design cited in Annex 1

Etsy

Web disclosureD4⚠ rejected as evidence

bag design cited in Annex 1

Web disclosureD5⚠ rejected as evidence

bag design cited in Annex 1

disclosed 2018-11-02

Web disclosureD6⚠ rejected as evidence

bag design cited in Annex 1

disclosed 2018-11-02

Web disclosureD7⚠ rejected as evidence

bag design cited in Annex 1

Etsy

Web disclosureD8⚠ rejected as evidence

bag design cited in Annex 1

Web disclosureD9⚠ rejected as evidence

bag design cited in Annex 1

BuzzFeed · disclosed 2016-11-17

Web disclosureD10⚠ rejected as evidence

bag design cited in Annex 1

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued the contested bag design lacked novelty and individual character over the holder's earlier RCD D1 and nine additional bag designs D2-D10 supported mainly by website extracts and links.
  • The holder challenged the evidentiary value of the internet extracts and inactive links, argued some disclosures were outside the EU or unrelated, and maintained the contested design created a different overall impression.
  • The Division treated only D1-D10 as properly invoked, excluded later-introduced new prior designs as inadmissible, accepted D1 as disclosed but unusable under the 12-month grace period, and found D2-D10 not proven disclosed under Article 7 CDR.
  • Because prior disclosure was not established, the Division did not assess novelty or individual character further and rejected the invalidity application, with costs awarded against the applicant.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENSEP
  • MemberBenjamin VAN Bavel

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

03.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000124157

vs Invented Here B.V.

2025-03-07Art 25(1)(b)037
000124416

vs Wenbo Huang

2025-01-28Art 25(1)(b)037
000121569

vs PANAGIOTIS SPILIOPOULOS

2024-06-12Art 25(1)(b)037
000121529

vs PANAGIOTIS SPILIOPOULOS

2024-05-31Art 25(1)(b)037
000121525

vs PANAGIOTIS SPILIOPOULOS

2024-05-24Art 25(1)(b)037
000121526

vs PANAGIOTIS SPILIOPOULOS

2024-05-24Art 25(1)(b)037
000121527

vs PANAGIOTIS SPILIOPOULOS

2024-05-23Art 25(1)(b)037
000121568

vs PANAGIOTIS SPILIOPOULOS

2024-05-23Art 25(1)(b)037