DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 015068408-0002

Invalidity · first instance · 2025-05-15

000127581

Contested design: 015068408-0002

EUDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the contested EU design is declared invalid, and the holder must pay EUR 750 in costs.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered EU design No 015068408-0002 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Interglobal Trading Solutions Group SLvia PDF extraction

Spain (ES)

Sant Cogut del Vallés, Spain

Holder · RCD owner

Shenzhen Xumingsheng Technology Co., LTD.

China (CN)

Shenzhen, Guangdong, China

Represented by

Francesco Agostini

Prior art cited (7)

Registered RCD

BallFall toy / board game

EU design No 015059997-0001 · EUIPO · disclosed 2024-05-14

Registered RCD

BallFall toy / board game

EU design No 015059997-0002 · EUIPO · disclosed 2024-05-14

Registered RCD

BallFall toy / board game

EU design No 015060010-0001 · EUIPO · disclosed 2024-05-14

Utility model

Set for the Development of Fine Motor Skills and Concentration

Spanish Utility Model application No 202331412 · Spanish Patent and Trademark Office · disclosed 2023-07-31

Other

BallFall game

US Copyright registration No TX 9379498 · U.S. Copyright Office · disclosed 2024-02-28

Web disclosure

BALLFALL offered by Nene Toys

https://www.amazon.es (ASIN B0C5RJNH12) · Amazon.es · disclosed 2023-05-19

Web disclosure

Video on applicant's 'Nene Toys' YouTube account showing the BallFall game

https://www.youtube.com · YouTube · disclosed 2024-01-22

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7Article 8(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that the contested board-game design lacked individual character over its earlier BallFall designs and disclosures, including Amazon and YouTube evidence, and also invoked other invalidity grounds.
  • The holder, although invited, filed no observations and left the invalidity application undefended.
  • The Invalidity Division found the Amazon listing sufficiently proved prior disclosure, considered designer freedom broad for board games, and held that the shared hexagonal tower, panels, poles and balls created the same overall impression.
  • The application was upheld because the contested design lacked individual character under Article 25(1)(b) in conjunction with Articles 4(1) and 6(1)(b) EUDR.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENĖ
  • MemberCarlos MATEO PÉREZ

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

21.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131885

vs Zhenkai Cui

2026-04-30REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000129622

vs Squar3D Aps

2026-04-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000129681

vs Squar3D Aps

2026-04-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000126976

vs Dohány Kft.

2026-04-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000131547

vs Brandworl Management Co., Limited

2026-04-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000131507

vs Shenzhen Chenyu New Energy Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-03-31REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000130128

vs joboo GmbH

2026-02-03REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218
000130086

vs CROSS BORDEP (HK) CO., LIMITED

2026-02-02REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)218