DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002625202-0009

Invalidity · first instance · 2026-02-06

000125639

Contested design: 002625202-0009

EUDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application against EU design No 002625202-0009 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 002625202-0009 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

Represented by

Brevetti Ing. Cirillo S.R.L.

Laura Cirillo

Holder · RCD owner

Decathlon SEvia PDF extraction

France (FR)

Villeneuve d'Ascq, France

Prior art cited (6)

National designD1

backpack

082010-0003 · INPI France · disclosed 2008-09-05

National designD2

backpack

082010-0004 · INPI France · disclosed 2008-09-05

Registered RCDD3

backpack

000962949-0001 · EUIPO design database · disclosed 2008-11-11

National designD4

backpack

042606-001 · INPI France · disclosed 2005-02-11

Web disclosureD5

Osprey Raptor 10 Men's Bike Hydration Backpack

https://amazon.com; ASIN B07GH97JXS · Amazon.com · disclosed 2014-04-09

Web disclosureD6

Osprey Syncro 10 Hydration Pack

https://amazon.com; ASIN B00ASKOAGW · Amazon.com · disclosed 2012-01-07

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5(1)(b)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity under Articles 25(1)(b), 4, 5 and 6, arguing the contested backpack lacked novelty and individual character over six earlier backpack designs and disclosures.
  • The holder argued the contested design had distinct visible features and a different overall impression, and disputed the applicant's characterization of the differentiating elements as merely technical.
  • The Division accepted disclosure of D1 to D6, found the informed user to be a person familiar with backpacks, and considered designer freedom not especially constrained beyond functional carrying requirements.
  • Comparing each prior design individually, the Division found clear differences in overall form, straps, structure, visible details and presentation, so the contested design retained individual character and was not identical to any cited design.
  • The invalidity application was rejected and the applicant was ordered to pay the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Deciding panel

  • MemberJessica N. LEWIS
  • MemberEmmanuel COLLIN
  • MemberCarmen SÁNCHEZ PALOMARES

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frFrenchoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

03.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000125601

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-06Art 25(1)(b)037
000125603

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-06Art 25(1)(b)037
000125557

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-06Art 25(1)(b)037
000125596

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-06Art 25(1)(b)037
000125597

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-05Art 25(1)(b)037
000125556

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-05Art 25(1)(b)037
000125555

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-05Art 25(1)(b)037
000125615

vs DECATHLON

2026-02-05Art 25(1)(b)037