DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 001431829-0005

Invalidity · first instance · 2018-04-30

000010301

Contested design: 001431829-0005

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity applications are upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay the applicants’ costs fixed at EUR 1,500 in total.

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 001431829-0005 is declared invalid. 3. The holder bears the applicants’ costs, fixed at EUR 750 for each applicant, EUR 1500 in total.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €1,500

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Mystic Products Import & Export, SLvia PDF extraction

Spain (ES)

Carrer Guifre Nº 689, Badalona 08918, Spain

Holder · RCD owner

Tinnus Enterprises, LLC

United States (US)

3429 18th Street, Plano, Texas, United States of America

Prior art cited (2)

Web disclosure

Article 'Bunch O Balloons will revolutionize water fights' showing the product filling multiple balloons simultaneously

www.arstechnica.com · Ars Technica · disclosed 2014-07-27

Patent

European patent application for the same balloon-filling technical solution

EP 3 005 948 A2 · European Patent Office · disclosed 2016-04-13

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 8(1)

Argument summary

  • Mystic and later joined applicant Koopman argued that the contested water-balloon filling design was composed entirely of features dictated by technical function, relying on a web article and the holder’s EP application.
  • The holder responded that the straw, balloon and band also reflected aesthetic choices, that patent wording could not determine design appearance, and that alternative forms existed in the same multiple filing.
  • Applying Article 8(1) CDR in light of DOCERAM, the Division assessed the product objectively as a utilitarian disposable item and found no evidence of independent design effort or visual enhancement.
  • The Division held that all essential features were solely technically dictated, declared the RCD invalid in full, and ordered the holder to bear both applicants’ costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI-ALOISI

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

23.01

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000132264

vs SHANDONG QIYUE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY CO.,LTD

2026-05-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
000131884

vs Zhaoqing Mikasi Home Hardware Co., LTD

2026-03-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
000130601

vs Zhou Canbin

2026-01-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
000127275

vs GRZEGORZ PIĄTEK PHU "TOP SERVIS"

2025-09-17REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
000128177

vs DECATHLON

2025-08-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
000126775

vs Ecomsoul Pro SRL

2025-07-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
0001267152025-07-10REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
000128196

vs Rafał Sowa

2025-07-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238