Invalidity · first instance · 2026-05-26
000129503
Contested design: 015039332-0011
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. 015039332-00011 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 (1)
Storage box sets shown in an undated website extract and in screenshots of posts from the account 'Simple Joy Deutschland'.
https://www.simple-joy.de · simple-joy.de / Facebook account 'Simple Joy Deutschland'
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character, arguing that the holder had previously promoted identical storage-box sets online and that the filing protected only an abstract concept.
- ›The holder filed no timely observations; it later sought restitutio in integrum, but that request was left unexamined because the decision ultimately favored the holder.
- ›The Division found the registered views clearly depicted a specific set of storage boxes, so the contested design qualified as a design rather than an unprotectable idea or use concept.
- ›The Division held the website extract and social-media screenshots did not reliably prove disclosure under Article 7(1), so the novelty and individual-character attack failed and the invalidity application was rejected.
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 |
| 000129501 vs Oro-Kong GmbH | 2026-05-26 | — | Art 25(1)(b), Art 25(1)(a) | 07 | 9 |
| 000129482 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 |
| 000129483 vs Oro-Kong GmbH | 2026-05-26 | — | 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 |
| 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 |