DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008629117-0023

Invalidity · first instance · 2024-10-15

000126063

Contested design: 008629117-0023

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld; Registered Community design No. 008629117-0023 is declared invalid, and the holder must bear costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text(de)

1. Dem Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung wird stattgegeben. 2. Das eingetragene Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmuster Nr. 008629117-0023 wird für nichtig erklärt. 3. Die Inhaberin trägt die Kosten, die auf 750 EUR festgesetzt werden.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Association GYIvia PDF extraction

France (FR)

78, allée Primavera Centre Ubidoca 20837, 74370 Annecy, Frankreich

Represented by

Agency Arnopatents

Holder · RCD owner

Stada Arzneimittel AGvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Stadastr. 2-18, 61118 Bad Vilbel, Deutschland

Represented by

Harmsen Utescher

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureD1

Pantoprazol AL label design shown in archived webpages

https://web.archive.org/web/20151022172435/http://www.aliud.de/arzneimittel/rezeptfreie-arzneimittel/pantoprazol-al/ ; https://web.archive.org/web/20160506115438im_/https://fachwelt.aliud.de/umbraco/api/resource/getpublicimage?id=14365 · Internet Archive Wayback Machine / aliud.de · disclosed 2015-10-22

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued the contested label design lacked novelty because an identical earlier design, D1, had already been disclosed online before the filing date.
  • The applicant relied on Internet Archive Wayback Machine screenshots from October 22, 2015 and May 6, 2016 showing D1 at the cited URLs.
  • The holder filed no observations in response to the invalidity application.
  • The Division found D1 had been publicly disclosed under Article 7(1) CDR and that the contested design was identical when assessed for novelty.
  • The application was upheld, the contested RCD was declared invalid, and costs were awarded against the holder.

Deciding panel

  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
  • MemberWolfgang SCHRAMEK

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishhuman translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
deGermanoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

19.08

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131626

vs Ningbo Yinzhou Wowo International Trade Co., Ltd.

2026-03-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000131384

vs Ningbo Yinzhou Wowo International Trade Co., Ltd.

2026-03-13REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000130967

vs Shenzhen Zhimei Chuangke E-commerce Co., Ltd.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000127580

vs JADWIGA ŁOWKIEWICZ

2025-10-22REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000129366

vs FHU Jarosław Wolski

2025-10-16REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000129423

vs AFFARGO LTD

2025-10-14REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000128919

vs Shenzhen Langmi Technology Co., Ltd

2025-07-31REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198
000126115

vs STADA Arzneimittel AG

2024-10-14REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)198