Invalidity · first instance · 2025-08-04
000128718
Contested design: 001096457-0001
Outcome
The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must pay the holder's fixed costs of EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text
1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered EU design No 001096457-0001 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
Elysium Laboratories Korlátolt Felelősségű Társaságvia PDF extraction
Hungary (HU)
Budapest, Hungary
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
György Ranyák
Hungary (HU)
Budapest, Hungary
Represented by
Prior art cited (12)
breathing device
000196035-0001 · European Union Registered Design · disclosed 2005-03-08
breathing device
D0900015-0001 · Hungary · disclosed 2019-04-29
breathing device
D0900015-0002 · Hungary · disclosed 2019-04-29
breathing device
D0900015-0003 · Hungary · disclosed 2019-04-29
breathing device
D0900015-0004 · Hungary · disclosed 2019-04-29
breathing device
D0900015-0005 · Hungary · disclosed 2019-04-29
breathing device
D9700619-0001 · Hungary · disclosed 2003-02-28
breathing device
D0400006-0001 and D0400006-0002 · Hungary · disclosed 2024-06-28
breathing device
D0900062-0001 · Hungary · disclosed 2024-08-28
breathing device
D1300209-0001 · Hungary · disclosed 2024-06-28
Csöpi nasal aspirator
http://ranyakuveg.hu · Internet Archive · disclosed 2007-07-28
nasal aspirator patent
AT 404555 B · Austria · disclosed 1998-12-28
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›Applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character and because the design's features were allegedly solely dictated by technical function, relying on D1-D12.
- ›Holder filed no observations in response to the invalidity application.
- ›The Division found the nasal aspirator design retained sufficient design freedom, so Article 8(1) did not invalidate the design as a whole.
- ›It also found D11 disclosed before priority but produced a different overall impression and was not identical, so the application was rejected.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000129371 vs joboo GmbH | 2026-05-05 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |
| 000126157 vs Illés Csók és Társa Vegyeskereskedő Kft | 2025-09-29 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |
| 000126197 vs Illés Csók és Társa Vegyeskereskedő Kft | 2025-09-29 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |
| 000126195 vs Illés Csók és Társa Vegyeskereskedő Kft | 2025-09-29 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |
| 000126196 vs Illés Csók és Társa Vegyeskereskedő Kft | 2025-09-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 7 |
| 000131246 vs Life Vac LLC | 2026-04-29 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 5 |
| 000131089 vs Rongrong Gao | 2026-04-23 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 5 |
| 000128555 vs Juliane Hesse-Ilyas | 2026-02-24 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 24 | 5 |