Invalidity · first instance · 2025-12-23
000123314
Contested design: 009180433-0001
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 European Union design No 009180433-0001 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
Al.Pi. s.r.l.via PDF extraction
Italy (IT)
Via Sansovino, 42, Morrovalle (MC), Italy
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Xinming Shoes Material Co.Ltdvia PDF extraction
China (CN)
Jinjiang City, Fujian Province, China
Represented by
Prior art cited (5)
soles for footwear / anti-slip sole design
EU design No 007707708-0001 · European Union Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2020-02-25
Italian ornamental model / invention excerpt
Italian Ornamental model No. 402003901134992 · Italian Ministry of Economy website
EU shape mark for climbing irons, footwear and training shoes
EUTM No 18 151 929 · EUIPO eSearch database · disclosed 2019-11-28
European patent on a shoe sole with an anti-slipping device
EP3589152 · European Patent Office · disclosed 2023-02-15
international patent publication concerning an anti-slipping sole device
WO 2018/158736 A1 · WIPO · disclosed 2018-09-07
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›Applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, technical-function exclusion, conflict with a prior design right, and conflict with its earlier shape mark.
- ›Holder argued the application was insufficiently substantiated, the design was not solely functional, and the cited earlier rights produced materially different appearances.
- ›The Division accepted disclosure of the earlier EU design and shape mark, but not the Italian model, and found the patent material did not prove all essential features were solely technical.
- ›Comparing the designs, the Division found clear shape differences producing a different overall impression and no identity for novelty purposes.
- ›The Article 25(1)(d) and (e) claims also failed, so the application was rejected in full and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000129160 vs ROAD STAR GROUP | 2026-03-17 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 7 |
| 000127175 vs GANNI A/S | 2025-12-22 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 7 |
| 000126217 vs NAVIMA CALZADOS, S.L. | 2025-08-04 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 7 |
| 000125895 vs Autumnpaper Limited | 2025-07-22 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 7 |
| 000123217 vs CM LAUFSTEG MÜNCHEN INTERNATIONAL BRANDS GmbH | 2024-12-17 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 7 |
| 000123218 vs CM LAUFSTEG MÜNCHEN INTERNATIONAL BRANDS GmbH | 2024-12-17 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 7 |
| 000122134 vs Loro Piana S.p.A. | 2024-11-29 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 7 |
| 000122154 vs Loro Piana S.p.A. | 2024-11-29 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 02 | 7 |