Invalidity · first instance · 2021-04-08
000110101
Contested design: 002773812-0003
Outcome
The invalidity application is rejected and the applicant must pay the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text
1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 0027738120003 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
Pitk Pelotas, S.L.via PDF extraction
Spain (ES)
Polígono Industrial Noain-Esquiroz, calle P, Número 22, 31110 Noain, Spain
Represented by
Jesús Maria Zugarrondo Temiño
Holder · RCD owner
Technogym S.p.A.
Italy (IT)
Via G. Perticari, 20, 47035, Gambettola, Forli’ – Cesena, Italy
Represented by
Prior art cited (9)
exercise equipment handle with monitor
CN2514864Y · Chinese patent publication · disclosed 2002-10-09
exercise equipment handle with monitor
CN2581004Y · Chinese patent publication · disclosed 2003-10-22
exercise equipment handle with monitor
CN2829803Y · Chinese patent publication · disclosed 2006-10-25
exercise equipment handle with monitor
CN2569834Y · Chinese patent publication · disclosed 2003-09-03
exercise equipment handle with monitor
CN102908750A · Chinese patent publication · disclosed 2013-02-06
exercise equipment handle with monitor
CN201120081Y · Chinese patent publication · disclosed 2008-09-24
exercise equipment handle with monitor
CN204233685U · Chinese patent publication · disclosed 2015-04-01
exercise equipment handle with monitor
CN2892180Y · Chinese patent publication · disclosed 2007-04-25
exercise equipment handle with monitor
TWM502489U · Taiwanese patent publication · disclosed 2015-06-11
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued that the contested exercise-machine handle and central display lacked novelty and individual character in light of nine earlier Chinese and Taiwanese patent disclosures.
- ›The holder contended that the cited designs differed in handle geometry, end elements, monitor shape, inclination, and central support structure, and denied any lack of individual character.
- ›The Invalidity Division accepted the cited patent extracts as prior disclosures under Article 7 CDR but compared each earlier design separately and found noticeable differences in proportions, screen placement, and handle configuration.
- ›The Division held that the contested RCD retained individual character and novelty, rejected the invalidity application, and ordered the applicant to bear EUR 400 in costs.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila CELISOVA
- MemberElisabetta FERRARO
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000128896 vs Sc Pitikot Store Srl | 2025-08-18 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000124438 vs АУТДОР ПЛЕЙ | 2025-04-03 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000126927 vs Jiujiang Storm E-Commerce Co., Ltd. | 2025-03-25 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000121617 vs nano Vo Sp. z o.o. | 2024-05-29 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000121616 vs nano Vo Sp. z o.o. | 2024-05-29 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000121615 vs nano Vo Sp. z o.o. | 2024-05-10 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000114244 vs UTILIS | 2024-01-09 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |
| 000121427 vs Jinhua Baiwei Plastic Products Co., Ltd. | 2023-11-15 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 21 | 7 |