DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 004539302-0003

Invalidity · first instance · 2020-04-06

000106800

Contested design: 004539302-0003

CDRmedium-confidence extraction

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must pay the holder's fixed costs of EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 004539302-0003 is rejected. 2. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

ESSAtech s.r.o.via PDF extraction

Czechia (CZ)

Pristoupim 85, 28201 Pristoupim, Czech Republic

Represented by

Jaroslav Novotný

Holder · RCD owner

ADS Leszek Kowalik, Bartłomiej Włodarczyk spółka cywilnavia PDF extraction

Poland (PL)

ul.Joachima Lelewela 23, 41-219 Sosnowiec, Poland

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosure⚠ rejected as evidence

Images of similar products with links to different websites, submitted in the rejoinder to show earlier disclosures.

different websites

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 8(1)Article 8(2)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity under Article 25(1)(b) CDR with Articles 8(1) and 8(2), arguing the design's circular elements, connecting strip, circuit placement and colour were technically dictated.
  • The holder replied that the applicant had not substantiated any lack of individual character and that the same technical function could be achieved with different shapes producing a different visual impression.
  • The Division found the applicant had not produced sufficiently solid evidence that all essential features were solely dictated by technical function under Article 8(1).
  • Although the round elements appeared necessary to fit around a round battery for interoperability purposes under Article 8(2), that did not justify invalidating the design as a whole.
  • The application was rejected and the applicant was ordered to bear the holder's representation costs.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila CELISOVA
  • MemberIvanka IVANOVA
  • MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI-ALOISI

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

14.03

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000131484

vs Junxian Wei

2026-05-20Art 25(1)(b)147
000127656

vs Suzhou Bimeng Technology Co., Ltd.

2025-09-26Art 25(1)(b)147
000127957

vs Suzhou Bimeng Technology Co., Ltd.

2025-05-28Art 25(1)(b)147
000126456

vs Shenzhen Weibo Technology Co., Ltd.

2024-12-12Art 25(1)(b)147
000106799

vs ADS LESZEK KOWALIK, BARTŁOMIEJ WŁODARCZYK SPÓŁKA CYWILNA

2020-04-06Art 25(1)(b)147
000130850

vs Michael AMARA

2026-04-23REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)145
000131224

vs Shenzhen Ruixin Fengshuo Electronic Co., Ltd

2026-03-06REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)145
000130970

vs Liu yanqiong

2026-02-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)145