Invalidity · first instance · 2026-02-06
000125596
Contested design: 002625202-0004
Outcome
The invalidity application against EU design No 002625202-0004 is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text(fr)
1. La demande en nullité à l’encontre du dessin ou modèle de l’UE enregistré nº 002625202-0004 est rejetée. 2. La demanderesse supporte les frais de la titulaire, fixés à 400 EUR.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Gianto S.R.L.via PDF extraction
Italy (IT)
Napoli, Italy
Holder · RCD owner
Decathlon SEvia PDF extraction
France (FR)
Villeneuve d'Ascq, France
Represented by
Prior art cited (6)
backpack
FR design No 082010-0003 · INPI France · disclosed 2008-09-05
backpack
FR design No 082010-0004 · INPI France · disclosed 2008-09-05
backpack
RCD No 000962949-0001 · EUIPO database · disclosed 2008-11-11
backpack
FR design No 042606-001 · INPI France · disclosed 2005-02-11
Osprey Raptor 10 Men's Bike Hydration Backpack
ASIN B07GH97JXS · Amazon.com · disclosed 2014-04-09
Osprey Syncro 10 Hydration Pack
ASIN B00ASKOAGW · Amazon.com · disclosed 2012-01-07
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant argued that the contested backpack design lacked novelty and individual character over six earlier backpack disclosures, including French and EU registrations and Amazon product pages.
- ›The holder replied that the cited designs created a different overall impression and pointed to the contested design’s distinctive gussets, seams, straps, zips, and color contrast.
- ›The Division accepted D1 to D6 as disclosed prior art, identified the informed user as a backpack user, and found broad designer freedom apart from functional constraints inherent in backpacks.
- ›Comparing each prior design individually, the Division found clear differences in overall shape, strap configuration, visible structure, and visual appearance, so the contested design retained individual character and novelty.
- ›The invalidity application was rejected and the applicant was ordered to pay the holder’s costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberJessica N. LEWIS
- MemberEmmanuel COLLIN
- MemberCarmen SÁNCHEZ PALOMARES
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frFrench | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000125601 vs DECATHLON | 2026-02-06 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 7 |
| 000125603 vs DECATHLON | 2026-02-06 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 7 |
| 000125639 vs DECATHLON | 2026-02-06 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 7 |
| 000125557 vs DECATHLON | 2026-02-06 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 7 |
| 000125597 vs DECATHLON | 2026-02-05 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 7 |
| 000125556 vs DECATHLON | 2026-02-05 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 7 |
| 000125555 vs DECATHLON | 2026-02-05 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 7 |
| 000125615 vs DECATHLON | 2026-02-05 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 03 | 7 |