DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 001481931-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2026-01-14

000129516

Contested design: 001481931-0001

EUDRmedium-confidence extraction

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must pay 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 001481931-0001 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

Anfs Distribution S.R.L.via PDF extraction

Romania (RO)

Bucharest, Romania

Represented by

Adrian Căvescu

Holder · RCD owner

Mohamar Jamouvia PDF extraction

Romania (RO)

Sat Afumati, Comuna Afumati, Judet Ilfov, Romania

Represented by

Elena Grecu

Prior art cited (4)

Web disclosureDocument 1⚠ rejected as evidence

Facebook post by Thelma Chan showing snake-shaped jelly products and transparent packaging.

Facebook · disclosed 2021-03-09

Prior useDocument 2⚠ rejected as evidence

Commercial invoice from Desun Enterprise (HK) Co., Limited for product 'Snake suck jelly jam'.

Desun Enterprise (HK) Co., Limited · disclosed 2018-03-06

OtherDocument 3⚠ rejected as evidence

Quotation sheet from Desun Enterprise (HK) Co., Limited showing various candy products including a snake jelly product.

Product No A-J009 · Desun Enterprise (HK) Co., Limited · disclosed 2018-03-06

Prior useDocument 4⚠ rejected as evidence

Affidavit by the director of Desun Enterprise (HK) Co., Limited asserting production and sale of snake jelly products since 2018.

Desun Enterprise (HK) Co., Limited · disclosed 2025-03-20

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 5(1)(b)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant claimed the contested jelly and packaging design lacked novelty and individual character based on disclosures from 2018 and 2021.
  • The holder argued the Facebook post, invoice, quotation sheet and affidavit did not prove effective public disclosure of a clearly identified prior design.
  • The Invalidity Division found the alleged prior designs were not properly identified and the evidence did not establish disclosure under Article 7(1) EUDR.
  • Because disclosure was not proven, the Division did not assess novelty or individual character and rejected the invalidity application.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberRasa BARAKAUSKIENĖ
  • MemberDimitrios ANDRIANOPOULOS

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

01.0109.03

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000123436

vs MOHAMAR JAMOU

2024-08-13Art 25(1)(b)09, 0110
000129539

vs MOHAMAR JAMOU

2026-01-14REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)09, 018
000120413

vs Hristo Shiderov

2025-02-07REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)09, 018
000125416

vs Rif Brand Total SRL

2024-08-19REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)09, 018
000120413

vs Hristo Shiderov

2023-10-16Art 25(1)(b)09, 018
000129508

vs Messerle GmbH

2026-04-23Art 25(1)(b)097
000129522

vs Messerle GmbH

2026-04-14Art 25(1)(b)097
000127995

vs Jaroslav Masopust

2026-02-06Art 25(1)(b)097