DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 001481931-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2024-08-13

000123436

Contested design: 001481931-0001

CDRmedium-confidence extraction

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's fixed costs of EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 0014819310001 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

Izvor Comercial Invest SrLvia PDF extraction

Romania (RO)

Str. Cpt. Juverdeanu, Nr. 45, Biroul NR.1, Sectorul 2, Bucharest, Romania

Represented by

Cristian Nastase

Holder · RCD owner

Mohamar Jamouvia PDF extraction

Romania (RO)

Strada Mihai Eminescu Nr. 25, Sat Afumati, Comuna Afumati, Judet Ilfov Romania

Represented by

Elena Grecu

Prior art cited (1)

Prior useAnnexes 3-7⚠ rejected as evidence

snake-shaped fruit jellies / jelly snakes

invoices, manufacturer statement and Alibaba website

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant alleged lack of novelty and individual character for the snake-shaped fruit-jelly design, relying on invoices, a manufacturer statement, and Alibaba printouts to show earlier disclosure before filing.
  • The holder argued the applicant had not proved any prior design or EU disclosure; the invoices lacked design details, the statement was uncorroborated, and the Alibaba materials were undated and territorially unclear.
  • The Division held the invoices, statement, and internet printouts did not provide solid, objective evidence of when and how the alleged earlier design was made available to the public under Article 7(1) CDR.
  • Because disclosure is a prerequisite for Articles 5 and 6, the Article 25(1)(b) invalidity ground failed; the application was rejected and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Deciding panel

  • MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
  • MemberChiara BORACE
  • MemberCarlos MATEO PÉREZ

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
deGermanhuman translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esSpanishhuman translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frFrenchhuman translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

01.0109.03

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000129516

vs MOHAMAR JAMOU

2026-01-14Art 25(1)(b)09, 0110
000129539

vs MOHAMAR JAMOU

2026-01-14REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)09, 018
000120413

vs Hristo Shiderov

2025-02-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)09, 018
000125416

vs Rif Brand Total SRL

2024-08-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)09, 018
000120413

vs Hristo Shiderov

2023-10-16Art 25(1)(b)09, 018
000129508

vs Messerle GmbH

2026-04-23Art 25(1)(b)097
000129522

vs Messerle GmbH

2026-04-14Art 25(1)(b)097
000127995

vs Jaroslav Masopust

2026-02-06Art 25(1)(b)097