Invalidity · first instance · 2020-05-25
000104927
Contested design: 001033450-0008
Outcome
The invalidity application is upheld, the contested RCD is declared invalid, and the holder must pay the applicant's costs fixed at EUR 750.
Show verbatim operative text
The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 0010334500008 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 (8)
manual showing stationary battery lids and their use
AlphaCell OPzS Battery Installation and Operation Manual · AlphaCell
publication on battery containers and lids
Innovative containers and lids for OPzS-OpzV batteries
storage battery cell cover
US1508926A · United States patent · disclosed 1924-09-16
handbook showing stationary batteries with central and lateral lid holes
Battery Technology Handbook · Marcel Dekker Inc. / Expert Verlag
engineering manual showing earlier battery lid designs
SMG (OpzV) - Valve regulated Recombination Cells - Engineering manual
handbook showing earlier battery lid designs
Handbook for Gel-VRLA-Batteries · EXIDE Technologies · disclosed 2003-12-01
catalog showing battery lid designs
PLASTAM · PLASTAM
catalog showing battery-related products including lid designs
Accuma · Accuma
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued that the battery-lid design was not visible in normal use, was entirely dictated by technical function, and in any event lacked novelty and individual character over earlier battery lid disclosures.
- ›The holder replied that the lid remained visible when used or sold separately, that alternative technical solutions existed, and that visual choices in the hole arrangement and overall thin form gave the design protectable character.
- ›The Invalidity Division found each identified feature of the lid served only technical purposes, and the holder did not substantiate any non-technical or aesthetic considerations that objectively guided those features.
- ›Relying on Article 8(1) CDR, the Division upheld the application and declared the contested RCD invalid without examining the remaining grounds.
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 |