DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 015075088-0003

Invalidity · first instance · 2025-06-18

000128335

Contested design: 015075088-0003

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, the registered EU design No 015075088-0003 is declared invalid, and the holder must bear costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text(fr)

1. La demande en nullité est accueillie. 2. Le dessin ou modèle de l’UE enregistré nº 015075088-0003 est déclaré nul. 3. La titulaire supporte les frais, fixés à EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Anotherwayvia PDF extraction

France (FR)

Marseille, France

Represented by

EY Ventury Avocats

Holder · RCD owner

INGA

France (FR)

Paris, France

Prior art cited (4)

Web disclosureAnnexe 1

screenshot of the prior two-sided sponge design from the INGA Instagram account

Instagram INGA · Instagram · disclosed 2022-12-14

Web disclosure

screenshot from a YouTube video showing the prior sponge design

YouTube video · YouTube · disclosed 2022-05-17

Web disclosureAnnexe 4

archived Ulule crowdfunding page showing INGA sponges in four colours including red

https://fr.ulule.com/inga-bien-fait/ · Internet Archive / Ulule · disclosed 2022-06-14

Web disclosureAnnexe 5

extracts from the Capeebara France Instagram account showing sponge products

Instagram Capeebara France · Instagram

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7(1)Article 7(2)

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that the contested two-sided sponge design had been disclosed by its creator more than one year before filing and lacked novelty and individual character.
  • The holder was invited to respond to the invalidity application but filed no observations.
  • The Invalidity Division first assessed individual character, accepted the INGA Instagram disclosure as prior public disclosure, and found broad designer freedom for double-sided sponges.
  • The compared designs created a very similar overall impression, with the visible red seam insufficient to differentiate the contested design.
  • The application was upheld in full and the contested design was declared invalid, so the Division did not examine the other ground or other prior designs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberJessica N. Lewis
  • MemberMichelle Marie DELLACHERIE

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
frFrenchoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

07.05

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131632

vs DETECTALIA EUROPE, S.L.U.

2026-05-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000129741

vs 2W ORGANIC

2026-05-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131788

vs Liu Xiaoxia

2026-05-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131628

vs Shenzhen Changhe Technology Co., Ltd

2026-04-30REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131704

vs Shenzhen Changhe Technology Co., Ltd

2026-04-29REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131745

vs Huan Wang

2026-04-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000130924

vs SOHAI HOUSEWARES CO.,LTD.

2026-04-17REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078
000131546

vs Foshan Changyuansheng Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-03-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)078