DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 001787714-0003

Invalidity · first instance · 2025-12-15

000128396

Contested design: 001787714-0003

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 001787714-0003 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Boombrush bvvia PDF extraction

Netherlands (NL)

Amsterdam, Netherlands

Represented by

Ac&R b.v.

Holder · RCD owner

Koninklijke Philips N.V.

Netherlands (NL)

Eindhoven, Netherlands

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureD10

Philips Sonicare Easyclean electric toothbrush shown in a user manual extract

holder's webpage · disclosed 2009-11-04

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that the contested electric toothbrush lacked novelty and individual character, relying in particular on Philips Sonicare Easyclean manual evidence dated 4 November 2009.
  • The holder argued that the design remained new and distinctive, challenged D10 as insufficient disclosure, and said the applicant improperly combined features from multiple earlier designs.
  • The Division accepted the bailiff-backed manual extract as a valid public disclosure under Article 7(1) EUDR and found the prior design sufficiently clear for comparison.
  • The Division found at least average designer freedom for electric toothbrushes and held that the contested design created the same overall impression as D10.
  • The application was upheld, the contested design was declared invalid for lack of individual character, and costs were awarded against the holder.

Deciding panel

  • MemberChiara BORACE
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES
  • MemberEmmanuel COLLIN

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

28.03

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130164

vs Moritz Neugebauer

2026-05-22REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000129241

vs Yi Wing Global Limited

2026-05-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000132044

vs Xucan XU

2026-05-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000131244

vs Shenzhen Lumei E-commerce Co., Ltd.

2026-03-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000130964

vs Changde Yameixun Network Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-02-06REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000130541

vs Medintim SL

2025-12-23REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000128157

vs Koninklijke Philips N.V.

2025-12-10REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288
000128638

vs Xiaoyan Kang

2025-12-10REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)288