Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2026-01-21
R0577/2025-3
Contested design: 008788145-0001
Outcome
The appeal is upheld, the contested decision is annulled, the case is remitted to the Invalidity Division for further examination of the invalidity application, and each party bears its own appeal costs.
Show verbatim operative text(it)
1 Il ricorso è accolto; 2 La decisione impugnata è annullata; 3 Il fascicolo è trasmesso alla Divisione di Annullamento per ulteriore esame della domanda di dichiarazione di nullità; 4 Ciascuna parte sopporterà le proprie spese sostenute nel procedimento di ricorso.
CostsEach party bears its own costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Fercaprime SLvia PDF extraction
Spain (ES)
Camino de Brijan Urb. Toscana Hills, 201, 29679 Benahavis, Spagna
Represented by
Tiffany De la Torre García
Holder · RCD owner
Alessio Granchivia PDF extraction
Italy (IT)
Via di Cerretalli, 12/3, 56033 Capannoli (PI), Italia
Represented by
Marika Bruno
Prior art cited (2)
international patent application for a cable guide / fish tape insertion tool
WO 2006/027400 · WIPO · disclosed 2006-03-16
catalog showing prior cable guide products and terminal variants
ESTIARE Anguila catalog · ESTIARE S.A.
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The holder appealed, arguing the design had individual character because technical constraints limited design freedom and the contested fish tape differed in color, helical body, symmetric ends, and connector structure from the cited patent.
- ›The invalidity applicant replied that WO 2006/027400 alone disclosed the same overall design, the alleged differences were minor or standard in the sector, and the catalog and market examples confirmed the lack of distinctiveness.
- ›The Board accepted the patent disclosure and admitted most new appeal evidence, but found design freedom was limited mainly to color, materials, surface treatment, and end shapes for cable guides.
- ›The Board held the contested design created a different overall impression from the patent because the visible color/material, helical body, symmetric double ends, and fixed flattened connector were immediately perceptible to the informed user.
- ›The appeal was upheld, the invalidity decision was annulled, and the case was remitted for examination of the other earlier designs invoked in the invalidity action.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
- RapporteurS. Rizzo
- MemberC. Negro
- RegistrarE. Wagner
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| itItalian | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0823/2024-3 | 2025-06-18 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b), Art 60(1) | — | 7 |
| R0010/2024-3 | 2024-10-02 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b), Art 60(1) | — | 7 |
| R0422/2023-3 | 2024-03-19 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b), Art 60(1) | — | 7 |
| R0353/2022-3 | 2023-03-10 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b), Art 60(1) | — | 7 |
| R1866/2021-3 | 2022-09-16 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b), Art 60(1) | — | 7 |
| R1804/2024-3 | 2025-11-19 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0922/2024-3 | 2025-07-08 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0370/2022-3 | 2025-03-13 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |