Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2022-07-01
R1585/2021-3
Contested design: 005300506-0005
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed; the design holder must bear the invalidity applicant’s costs and fees in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal; 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs and fees incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Cavius ApSvia PDF extraction
Denmark (DK)
Julsøvej 16, 8600 Silkeborg, Denmark
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Shenzhen Heiman Technology Co., Ltd.via PDF extraction
China (CN)
No.84 Fuqian Road, Yuexingwei Community, Guanlan, Longhua New District, Shenzhen, People’s Republic of China
Prior art cited (1)
smoke detector / smoke alarm
RCD No 3 528 645-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2016-12-22
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder argued that smoke-alarm design freedom was constrained by technical and regulatory requirements and that the contested design’s cleaner, more minimal appearance differed overall.
- ›The invalidity applicant responded that only limited functional constraints existed and that the prior and contested smoke alarms shared the same key proportions, structure, and placement of features.
- ›The Board held that the earlier RCD had clearly been disclosed and that smoke-alarm designers retained considerable freedom over the product’s outer appearance.
- ›Because the coinciding cylindrical base, body, recessed smoke chamber, and top dominated the comparison, the Board confirmed the lack of individual character.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurC. Negro
- MemberE. Fink
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1336/2024-3 | 2025-03-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R1015/2024-3 | 2024-11-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R1719/2023-3 | 2024-06-21 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R1747/2022-3 | 2024-01-29 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R0367/2022-3 | 2023-06-26 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2024/2021-3 | 2022-07-20 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2025/2021-3 | 2022-07-20 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2026/2021-3 | 2022-07-20 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |