Invalidity · first instance · 2020-05-22
000104919
Contested design: 001033450-0001
Outcome
The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay EUR 750 in costs.
Show verbatim operative text
The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 001033450-0001 is declared invalid. The holder bears the applicant’s costs, fixed at EUR 750.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
ACCUMA S.P.A.
Italy (IT)
Via Eustachi, 46, 20129 Milano, Italy
Represented by
Giulio Enrico Sironi
Holder · RCD owner
ACCUMALUX
LU
Allée de la Poudrerie, 1899 Kockelscheuer, Luxembourg
Represented by
Prior art cited (6)
battery installation and operation manual showing battery lid forms
AlphaCell OPzS Battery Installation and Operation Manual
publication on stationary battery containers and lids
Innovative containers and lids for OPzS-OpzV batteries
storage battery cell cover patent
US1508926A · United States patent · disclosed 1924-09-16
handbook showing stationary battery lids with central and lateral holes
Battery Technology Handbook · Marcel Dekker Inc. / Expert Verlag
engineering manual cited as showing similar battery lid forms
SMG (OpzV) - Valve regulated Recombination Cells - Engineering manual
battery handbook cited as showing similar battery lid forms
Handbook for Gel-VRLA-Batteries · EXIDE Technologies · disclosed 2003-12-01
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued the battery-lid design lacked protection because its features were not visible in use, were solely technically dictated, and lacked novelty and individual character over earlier disclosures.
- ›The holder contested all grounds, arguing the lid remained visible in use, alternative designs existed, and aesthetic choices shaped the holes, edges, proportions, and overall appearance.
- ›The Division found each identified feature of the lid served only technical functions and that the holder did not prove any objectively supported visual considerations influenced those features.
- ›The application was upheld under Article 8(1) CDR, the RCD was declared invalid, and the remaining invalidity grounds were left unexamined.
Deciding panel
- MemberStephan HANNE
- MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
- MemberMichele M. BENEDETTI - ALOISI
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| 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 ↗ |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000129383 vs Wenzhou Haotian Electric Co., Ltd. | 2026-03-27 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 13 | 8 |
| 000129363 vs Wenzhou Haotian Electric Co., Ltd. | 2026-03-27 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 13 | 8 |
| 000131764 vs Dongguan Penghui New Energy Technology Co., Ltd | 2026-03-19 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 13 | 8 |
| 000129921 vs SHENZHEN EASTKING TECHNOLOGY CO.,LTD | 2026-03-13 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 13 | 8 |
| 000131186 vs Electronic Way Technology Co.,Ltd | 2026-03-09 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 13 | 8 |
| 000128636 vs Guangzhou Quemou Trading Co., Ltd. | 2026-02-27 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 13 | 8 |
| 000128598 vs Guangzhou Quemou Trading Co., Ltd. | 2026-02-17 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 13 | 8 |
| 000129221 vs Shenzhen Guangtuo Da Lighting Co., LTD | 2026-01-27 | REUD invalidated | Art 25(1)(b) | 13 | 8 |