Invalidity · first instance · 2018-06-08
000010565
Contested design: 001877390-0001
Outcome
The application for a declaration of invalidity is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
1. Der Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung des eingetragenen Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmusters Nr. 001877390-0001 wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten des Inhabers, die auf 400 EUR festgesetzt werden.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
DeeBee Entertainment GmbH
Germany (DE)
Ligusterweg 5, 85375 Neufahrn bei Freising, Deutschland
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Peter Lippert
Germany (DE)
Potsdamer Straße 98, 10785 Berlin, Deutschland
Represented by
Klaus Castell
Prior art cited (35)
toy building block, part of a ball track
001081590-0001 · EUIPO eSearch / Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2009-02-11
toy building block, part of a ball track
001081590-0002 · EUIPO eSearch / Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2009-02-11
toy building block, part of a ball track
001081590-0003 · EUIPO eSearch / Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2009-02-11
toy building block, part of a ball track
001081590-0004 · EUIPO eSearch / Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2009-02-11
toy building block, part of a ball track
001081590-0005 · EUIPO eSearch / Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2009-02-11
toy building block, part of a ball track
001081590-0006 · EUIPO eSearch / Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2009-02-11
ball game / toy building block
DE 402011000217-0001 · DPMA Designblatt · disclosed 2001-03-18
ball game / toy building block
DE 402011000217-0002 · DPMA Designblatt · disclosed 2001-03-18
ball game / toy building block
DE 402011000217-0003 · DPMA Designblatt · disclosed 2001-03-18
ball game / toy building block
DE 402011000217-0004 · DPMA Designblatt · disclosed 2001-03-18
Cascaden-Kugelbahn
DE M8904735-0001 · DPMA database
Steckspiele "Kugelbahn"
DE M9301670-0001 · DPMA database
Steckspiele "Kugelbahn"
DE M9301670-0002 · DPMA database
Steckspiele "Kugelbahn"
DE M9301670-0003 · DPMA database
Kugelbahn Clown
DE M9805906-0001 · DPMA database
Kugelbahn
DE 49905343-0001 · DPMA database
Kugelbahn
DE 40007861-0001 · DPMA database
Kugelbahn als haptische Verkaufshilfe
DE 40205701-0001 · DPMA database
ball track assembled from construction elements
DE 29620254U1 · DPMA database · disclosed 1997-03-06
component and arrangement for producing geometric forms
DE 29805130U1 · DPMA database · disclosed 1998-07-23
ball track
DE 202004007574U1 · DPMA database · disclosed 2005-10-27
toy ball track
DE202010003985U1 · DPMA database · disclosed 2010-08-05
Amazon.de listing for a ball track product
Amazon.de
Amazon.de listing for a ball track product
Amazon.de
Amazon.de listing for a ball track product
Amazon.de
Amazon.de listing for a ball track product
Amazon.de
Amazon.de listing for a ball track product
Amazon.de
Amazon.de listing for a ball track product
Amazon.de
Amazon.de listing for a ball track product
Amazon.de
Amazon.de listing for a ball track product
Amazon.de
Amazon.de listing for a ball track product
Amazon.de
Amazon.de listing for a ball track product
Amazon.de
ball tracks “M”
holzgestaltung.de · holzgestaltung.de · disclosed 2016-12-01
LEGO ball track and component parts
brickset.com · brickset.com · disclosed 2016-11-30
ball track, component parts and other building blocks
hubelino.de · hubelino.de · disclosed 2016-12-12
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant argued that the contested marble-run block was dictated by technical function and also lacked novelty and individual character over earlier design, utility-model, and web disclosures.
- ›The holder replied that neither the semicircular groove nor the underside connection was technically inevitable, and that the contested design remained visually distinct from the cited prior art.
- ›The Division found no convincing proof that the block's essential features were exclusively technically dictated, noting design freedom for the groove, proportions, and modular-system underside.
- ›For novelty and individual character, only D1 to D10 were usable as older designs; the remaining citations were too vaguely identified or inadequately evidenced, and none of D1 to D10 produced identity or the same overall impression.
- ›The invalidity grounds under Article 25(1)(b) failed, so the application was rejected and the applicant was ordered to pay EUR 400 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberStephan HANNE
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
- MemberAndré Gerd Günther BOSSE
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| deGerman | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Locarno classes
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000109222 vs DELTA-SPORT Handelskontor GmbH | 2020-02-12 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 8 |
| 000109203 vs DELTA-SPORT Handelskontor GmbH | 2020-02-11 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 8 |
| 000105502 vs NIKE Innovate C.V. | 2019-10-08 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 8 |
| 000105761 vs Hui ZENG | 2019-09-13 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 8 |
| 000104239 vs REPLIC HOCKEY SL | 2019-08-05 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 8 |
| 000105219 vs CHROME CHERRY DESIGN STUDIO (PTY) LTD | 2019-07-30 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 8 |
| 000011219 vs TCC Global N.V. | 2018-12-03 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 8 |
| 000011052 vs Qizhi Chen | 2018-08-28 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 8 |