DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 015102247-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2026-02-26

000130709

Contested design: 015102247-0001

EUDRmedium-confidence extraction

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must bear 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 015102247-0001 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

NPD Partnership Ltdvia PDF extraction

United Kingdom (GB)

Surrey, United Kingdom

Represented by

The Legal Group

Holder · RCD owner

Shantou Chenghai district Shuangjia plastic toy factory

China (CN)

Shantou City, Guangdong Province, China

Represented by

Santarelli

Prior art cited (4)

PublicationD1⚠ rejected as evidence

Alphabet Game board game sketch/leaflet

leaflet · disclosed 2011-12-25

Web disclosureD2⚠ rejected as evidence

Pim Pam Pet - The Battle board game and packaging

https://www.youtube.com · internet offer, YouTube screenshots, and test report

Web disclosureD3

Tapple board game

www.boardgamegeek.com · BoardGameGeek

Trade markD4

3D mark depicting a board game

EUTM registration No 019153249 · European Union Trade Marks Bulletin · disclosed 2025-04-09

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicants argued that the contested toy design lacked novelty and individual character in light of earlier Alphabet Game, Pim Pam Pet, Tapple, and 3D mark disclosures.
  • The holder filed no observations in response to the invalidity application.
  • The Division found D1 and D2 were not proven disclosed under Article 7(1), but accepted D3 and D4 as prior disclosures.
  • Comparing D3 and D4 with the contested design, the Division found clear differences in decorative features and overall appearance, so individual character and novelty were preserved.
  • The invalidity application was rejected and the applicants were ordered to pay the holder's fixed representation costs of EUR 400.

Deciding panel

  • MemberEnrico D’ERRICO
  • MemberDimitrios ANDRIANOPOULOS
  • 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

21.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130341

vs Mortensen Software Consulting ApS

2026-05-27Art 25(1)(b)217
000129371

vs joboo GmbH

2026-05-05Art 25(1)(b)217
000129661

vs Squar3D Aps

2026-04-29Art 25(1)(b)217
000129624

vs Squar3D Aps

2026-04-29Art 25(1)(b)217
000129621

vs Squar3D Aps

2026-04-29Art 25(1)(b)217
000128937

vs Liyou Industrial Co., Ltd

2026-02-24Art 25(1)(b)217
000130683

vs Shengzhi Jiang

2026-02-23Art 25(1)(b)217
000130684

vs Shengzhi Jiang

2026-02-23Art 25(1)(b)217