Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2021-07-05
R1070/2020-3
Contested design: 004539302-0001
Outcome
The contested decision is annulled, Community design No 4 539 302-0001 is declared invalid, and the design holder must bear the invalidity applicant’s costs fixed at EUR 2,050.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Annuls the contested decision and declares Community design No 4 539 302-0001 invalid; 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs and fees incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings; 3. Fixes the costs to be paid by the design holder to the invalidity applicant for the invalidity and appeal proceedings at EUR 2 050.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €2,050
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
ESSAtechvia PDF extraction
Czechia (CZ)
Pristoupim 85, 28201 Pristoupim, Czech Republic
Represented by
Jurate Breimelyte
Holder · RCD owner
ADS LESZEK KOWALIK, BARTŁOMIEJ WŁODARCZYK SPÓŁKA CYWILNAvia PDF extraction
Poland (PL)
UL.Joachima Lelewela 23, 41-219 SosnowieC, Poland
Represented by
Prior art cited (2)
Photographs showing internal parts of a vehicle key with a round battery and battery-disconnector component
Hyperlinks and images of similar battery-controller designs used with round batteries
Internet pages submitted by the invalidity applicant
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant argued that the circular plates, connecting strip, circuit placement and conductive colour were all chosen solely to let the device disconnect a round battery inside a remote key.
- ›The design holder responded that different shapes could achieve the same technical result and that the standalone product’s appearance and colour could still reflect aesthetic choices.
- ›The Board found that the configuration of the contested design was exclusively designed to perform the technical function of cutting off the power supply and that the designer’s concerns were technical, not visual.
- ›The contested decision was annulled, the RCD was declared invalid, and the design holder was ordered to pay EUR 2,050 in costs and fees.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurH. Salmi
- MemberM. Bra
- RegistrarR. Vidal
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| frFrench | human translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2414/2018-3 | 2023-03-01 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R1866/2021-3 | 2022-09-16 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R1072/2020-3 | 2021-07-14 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R2413/2018-3 | 2020-05-15 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R1393/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Remitted (further prosecution) | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 6 |
| R1394/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 6 |
| R1395/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 6 |
| R1800/2025-3 | 2026-04-27 | Remitted (further prosecution) | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 6 |