Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2023-06-07
R1741/2022-3
Contested design: 008213458-0003
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed and the design holder must bear the invalidity applicant's costs and fees in both instances.
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
Irgens Engineering ASvia PDF extraction
Norway (NO)
Tjernveien 12, 1397 Nesoya, Norway
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Acorn Intellectual Properties Ltdvia PDF extraction
JE
Le Quai d’Auvergne, La Collette, 2 3TN St. Helier, Jersey
Represented by
Prior art cited (1)
prior Community design for pipe joints / pipe clamps
002170811-0001
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder appealed the invalidation of its pipe-joint RCD, arguing limited design freedom, technical-function constraints, and several shape differences from the prior design.
- ›The invalidity applicant replied that the comparison must rest on the registered views and that the alleged differences were minor within a relatively broad design freedom.
- ›The Board found the key similarities in the circular two-ring clamp, four inward teeth, and aligned holes outweighed the minor differences, and it rejected the Article 8(1) technical-function objection.
- ›The prior design destroyed individual character, so the invalidity decision was confirmed and the appeal dismissed.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurC. Bartos
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0181/2025-3 | 2025-05-27 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0827/2024-3 | 2025-03-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1336/2024-3 | 2025-03-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0797/2024-3 | 2025-01-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1123/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1125/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1124/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1015/2024-3 | 2024-11-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |