DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003765445-0004

Invalidity · first instance · 2024-10-17

000122614

Contested design: 003765445-0004

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

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

Show verbatim operative text(de)

1. Der Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung des eingetragenen Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmusters Nr. 003765445-0004 wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten der Inhaberin, die auf 400 EUR festgesetzt werden.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Duravit Aktiengesellschaftvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Werderstr. 36, 78132 Hornberg, Deutschland

Holder · RCD owner

FM Marketing GmbHvia PDF extraction

Austria (AT)

Schalkham 77, 5202 Neumarkt am Wallersee, Österreich

Represented by

von Bülow & Tamada

Prior art cited (2)

Trade mark

DURAVIT figurative mark

German trademark No. 2 038 947 · DPMA online database · disclosed 1993-06-23

International designDesign No. 2⚠ rejected as evidence

Nearly identical international design cited to show a clearer image on the remote control

DM/214407

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(e)Article 10(2)(b)Article 10(2)(a)Article 10(2)(c)

Argument summary

  • Applicant sought invalidity under Article 25(1)(e), arguing the contested remote-control design used its earlier German DURAVIT figurative mark for sanitary goods.
  • Holder denied any meaningful sign similarity, argued the alleged mark was barely visible in the registered image, and requested rejection or alternatively limited maintenance.
  • The Division held the assessment was confined to the contested RCD view and the earlier mark; even enlarged, the visible element did not let the public perceive DURAVIT.
  • Because the signs were not similar, confusion and identity-based claims failed; any later fame-based theory was also inadmissible or unsupported, so the application was rejected.

Deciding panel

  • MemberWolfgang SCHRAMEK
  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO

Decision files

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

Locarno classes

14.03

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131484

vs Junxian Wei

2026-05-20145
000127656

vs Suzhou Bimeng Technology Co., Ltd.

2025-09-26145
000127957

vs Suzhou Bimeng Technology Co., Ltd.

2025-05-28145
000126456

vs Shenzhen Weibo Technology Co., Ltd.

2024-12-12145
000106799

vs ADS LESZEK KOWALIK, BARTŁOMIEJ WŁODARCZYK SPÓŁKA CYWILNA

2020-04-06145
000106800

vs ADS LESZEK KOWALIK, BARTŁOMIEJ WŁODARCZYK SPÓŁKA CYWILNA

2020-04-06145
000106539

vs Shenzhen Huasheng Electronic Technology Co., Ltd.

2019-11-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(e)145
000130683

vs Shengzhi Jiang

2026-02-23Art 25(1)(e)4