Invalidity · first instance · 2026-05-05
000129371
Contested design: 003733534-0001
Outcome
The application for a declaration of invalidity is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
1. Der Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung des eingetragenen EU-Geschmacksmusters Nr. 003733534-0001 wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten der Inhaberin, die auf 400 EUR festgesetzt werden.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Ruby-Toys BVvia PDF extraction
Netherlands (NL)
Eindhoven, Niederlande
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
joboo GmbH
Germany (DE)
Jungingen, Deutschland
Represented by
Prior art cited (7)
closure devices and accessories
Nr. 40500871-0011 · DPMA · disclosed 2005-06-25
lamps
49807890-0020 · DPMA · disclosed 1999-04-10
figures for board games
Nr. 035209-0001 · INPI · disclosed 2004-01-02
figures for board games
Nr. 035209-0007 · INPI · disclosed 2004-01-02
figures for board games
Nr. 035209-0002 · INPI · disclosed 2024-01-02
stacking caps shown on Amazon
amazon.de page, ASIN BOOBDKP18M · amazon.de · disclosed 2013-02-09
Heroscape game markers / pieces
ebay.com page showing "Heroscape Wound Markers" / "Heroscape Wundmarker" · ebay.com
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, relying on D1 to D7 and arguing the compared designs shared the same dome-and-base overall impression.
- ›The holder requested rejection and argued the contested design was defined by features absent from the prior art, especially the convex base, flattened dome, wavy lower edge, and bowl-shaped hollow interior.
- ›The Division accepted D1 to D6 as disclosed, rejected D7 as unreliable evidence of pre-2017 disclosure, found broad designer freedom, and considered the contested design visibly different in proportions, contours, and surface features.
- ›The invalidity grounds under Articles 5 and 6 failed, so the application was rejected and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
- MemberWolfgang SCHRAMEK
- MemberIvo TSENKOV
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deGerman | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000128937 vs Liyou Industrial Co., Ltd | 2026-02-24 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21, 06 | 10 |
| 000114703 vs Xin Huang | 2021-07-27 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 06, 24 | 8 |
| 000108164 | 2020-02-05 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 21, 06 | 8 |
| 000106859 vs YONG CHEN | 2019-10-24 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 21, 06 | 8 |
| 000101959 vs Matthew Bembridge | 2018-12-19 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 21, 06 | 8 |
| 000130341 vs Mortensen Software Consulting ApS | 2026-05-27 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000128557 vs Washtower IP B.V. | 2026-05-19 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 06 | 7 |
| 000128656 vs Washtower IP B.V. | 2026-05-19 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 06 | 7 |