Invalidity · first instance · 2025-07-17
000128596
Contested design: 015070350-0001
Outcome
The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered EU design No 015070350-0001 is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text
1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered EU design No 015070350-0001 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
Mafi Group ABvia PDF extraction
Sweden (SE)
Mora, Sweden
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Griptel AB
Sweden (SE)
Örebro, Sweden
Prior art cited (2)
footstep / feet of ladders, step ladders for telecom towers
REUD No 015030800-0001 · Designview / EU Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2023-08-21
footstep / feet of ladders, step ladders for telecom towers
REUD No 015030800-0002 · Designview / EU Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2023-08-21
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity under Article 25(1)(b) EUDR, arguing the contested step-ladder design lacked novelty and individual character over its earlier REUDs No 015030800-0001 and 015030800-0002.
- ›The holder was invited to respond but filed no observations.
- ›The Division accepted both earlier REUDs as disclosed before the contested filing date and considered designer freedom not severely limited despite functional and safety constraints.
- ›It found the contested dual-step unit differed in structure, proportions, bracket integration, symmetry, and stop-tab presentation, so it created a different overall impression from both earlier designs.
- ›Because the cited prior designs were neither identical nor capable of depriving the contested design of individual character, the application was rejected and costs were awarded against the applicant.
Deciding panel
- MemberEnrico D'ERRICO
- MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES
- MemberCarlos MATEO PÉREZ
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Locarno classes
Similar decisions
Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.
| Case | Date | Outcome | Shared grounds | Locarno | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000124436 vs Ziel Home Furnishing Technology Co., Ltd. | 2024-11-19 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000121100 vs TABB Interior Systems B.V. | 2024-01-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000121138 vs TABB Interior Systems B.V. | 2024-01-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000121099 vs TABB Interior Systems B.V. | 2024-01-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000120379 vs Ergosafe Aktiebolag | 2023-10-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000120958 vs Yimei Zhu | 2023-07-27 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000119859 vs BoZarc | 2023-06-02 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |
| 000117077 vs Budotechnika Sp. o.o. | 2022-12-13 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 25 | 7 |