Invalidity · first instance · 2026-05-26
000129482
Contested design: 015039332-0005
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. 015039332-0005 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
Fuzhou Qisuo Advertising Planning Co., Ltd.via PDF extraction
China (CN)
Fuzhou, Fujian, China
Holder · RCD owner
Oro-Kong GmbH
Germany (DE)
Ruppach-Goldhausen, Deutschland
Prior art cited (2)
Undated internet extract showing drawers with storage boxes
https://www.simple-joy.de · simple-joy.de
Screenshots of posts showing storage-box sets
Facebook account "Simple Joy Deutschland" · Facebook
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›Applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, alleging the holder had promoted identical storage-box sets on Facebook and its website more than a year before filing.
- ›Applicant also argued the filing protected only the abstract idea or functional concept of modular storage boxes fitting standard drawers, so it was not a design under Article 3(1).
- ›Holder filed no timely observations; its later restitutio request was left unexamined because the decision dismissed the invalidity application and did not adversely affect the holder.
- ›The Division found the representations clearly showed a definite set of six storage boxes, not a mere abstract idea, and the internet evidence lacked reliable source and date information to prove disclosure.
- ›The invalidity application was rejected as unfounded, and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberIvo TSENKOV
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
- MemberIvan PRANDZHEV
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000129481 vs Oro-Kong GmbH | 2026-05-27 | — | Art 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a) | 07 | 9 |
| 000129484 vs Oro-Kong GmbH | 2026-05-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a) | 07 | 9 |
| 000129502 vs Oro-Kong GmbH | 2026-05-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a) | 07 | 9 |
| 000129501 vs Oro-Kong GmbH | 2026-05-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a) | 07 | 9 |
| 000129503 vs Oro-Kong GmbH | 2026-05-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a) | 07 | 9 |
| 000129483 vs Oro-Kong GmbH | 2026-05-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a) | 07 | 9 |
| 000130704 vs Shenzhen Yisi Technology Co., Ltd. | 2026-05-22 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 07 | 7 |
| 000131705 vs DETECTALIA EUROPE, S.L.U. | 2026-05-14 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 07 | 7 |