Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2021-07-12
R1008/2018-3
Contested design: 001431829-0005
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed; the design holder must bear the invalidity applicants’ costs, fixed at EUR 1,250 for each applicant.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal; 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs incurred by the invalidity applicants; 3. Fixes the costs and fees to be paid by the design holder to the invalidity applicants for the invalidity and the appeal proceedings at EUR 1 250 each.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €2,500
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Mystic Products Import & Export, SLvia PDF extraction
Spain (ES)
Carrer Guifre Nº 689, 08918 Badalona, Spain
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Tinnus Enterprises, LLCvia PDF extraction
United States (US)
3429 18th Street, Plano Texas, United States of America
Represented by
Prior art cited (2)
Ars Technica article 'Bunch O Balloons will revolutionise water fights' showing the product
www.arstechnica.com · disclosed 2014-07-27
European patent application showing the same technical solution for filling multiple balloons simultaneously
EP 3 005 948 A2 · European Patent Office · disclosed 2016-04-13
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder appealed the invalidation of its fluid-distribution design, arguing that the product’s appearance also reflected aesthetic choices and that the design had individual character.
- ›The two invalidity applicants argued that the shape of the product’s essential features was chosen solely to perform the technical function of simultaneously filling multiple balloons and relied on patent-based and prior-disclosure evidence.
- ›The Board concluded that the contested design’s essential features were solely dictated by technical function under Article 8(1) CDR and that the holder’s explanations about aesthetics did not change that assessment.
- ›The appeal was dismissed and the design holder was ordered to pay EUR 1,250 to each invalidity applicant for invalidity and appeal costs.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurH. Salmi
- MemberE. Fink
- RegistrarR. Vidal
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| frFrench | human 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1394/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R1395/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R1826/2025-3 | 2026-04-22 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R0947/2025-3 | 2026-04-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R2089/2024-3 | 2025-08-22 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R2328/2024-3 | 2025-08-22 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R0204/2024-3 | 2025-06-04 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R0029/2018-3 | 2024-09-09 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |