DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 006658613-0016

Invalidity · first instance · 2025-10-10

000125778

Contested design: 006658613-0016

EUDRRCD lapsed at decision

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld, Registered EU design No 006658613-0016 is declared invalid, and the holder must bear costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. 2. Registered EU design No 006658613-0016 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Vitra Collections AGvia PDF extraction

Switzerland (CH)

Muttenz, Switzerland

Holder · RCD owner

Lei Hou

China (CN)

Shanghai, China

Represented by

Maria Ioannides

Prior art cited (3)

Catalogexhibit 7

catalog page showing the 'Eames Plastic Armchair DSW' chair

VITRA 'Home Stories' · VITRA 'Home Stories' catalogue

Catalogexhibit 11

French catalogue page showing the 'Eames Plastic Armchair DSW' chair

VITRA 'Eames Plastic Chair' · VITRA 'Eames Plastic Chair' catalogue

Web disclosureannex 3 / exhibit 10

online image of the 'Eames Plastic Armchair DSW' chair

Twitter post by @3docean_new · Twitter · disclosed 2016-12-23

Legal grounds invoked

Article 24(2)Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that the contested chair lacked novelty and individual character over earlier disclosures of the Eames Plastic Armchair DSW and also invoked copyright-based invalidity.
  • Because the design had expired, the applicant additionally requested a decision on the merits under Article 24(2); the holder filed no observations.
  • The Division accepted the 2015 and 2018 VITRA catalogues and the 23/12/2016 Twitter post as prior public disclosures and treated designer freedom for chairs as very broad.
  • It found the shared seat shell, wooden legs, X-shaped crosspieces and black fittings dominated the overall impression, while the seat-colour difference did not, so the design lacked individual character and was invalidated.

Deciding panel

  • MemberEnrico D'ERRICO
  • MemberEmmanuel COLLIN
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

06.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131404

vs Jiahe Lin

2026-05-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)068
000128578

vs Washtower IP B.V.

2026-05-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)068
000128655

vs Washtower IP B.V.

2026-05-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)068
000128637

vs Washtower IP B.V.

2026-05-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)068
000128735

vs OÜ REPSTON

2026-04-24REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)068
000129372

vs Xuefang Cai

2026-03-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)068
000130973

vs Højer Møbler A/S

2026-03-10REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)068
000130975

vs Højer Møbler A/S

2026-03-10REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)068