DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 000322557-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2022-06-15

000115342

Contested design: 000322557-0001

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The application for a declaration of invalidity of Registered Community design No 000322557-0001 is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holders' costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text(de)

1. Der Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung des eingetragenen Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmusters Nr. 000322557-0001 wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten der Inhaber, die auf 400 EUR festgesetzt werden.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

DJO, LLCvia PDF extraction

United States (US)

5919 Sea Otter Place, Suite #200, Carlsbad, California 92010, Vereingte Staaten von Amerika

Holder · RCD owner

Hallufix AGvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Tulbeckstr. 32, 80339 München, Deutschland

Prior art cited (1)

PatentD1⚠ rejected as evidence

orthopaedic device for correcting toe misalignments

EP 1 688 106 B1 · European patent publication · disclosed 2006-08-09

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5(1)(b)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7(1)Article 8(1)

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity under Article 25(1)(b), arguing the hallux-valgus splint was purely technical and lacked novelty and individual character over D1, EP 1 688 106 B1.
  • The holders argued the contested design remained new and individual, was not exclusively technically dictated, and noted an earlier invalidity case had already rejected the same legal grounds.
  • The Division held the technical-function evidence did not show that the concrete shapes and proportions of the splint's features were exclusively dictated by function; technical marketing references alone were insufficient.
  • The Division also found no proof that D1 had been disclosed before the contested RCD's filing date, because the patent publication date was 9 August 2006, after 8 April 2005.
  • The application was therefore rejected, and the applicant was ordered to pay the holders' fixed costs of EUR 400.

Deciding panel

  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
  • MemberIvanka IVANOVA

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
deGermanoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

24.04

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000117392

vs CILAG GMBH INTERNATIONAL

2023-05-15Art 25(1)(b)247
000118097

vs CILAG GMBH INTERNATIONAL

2023-05-15Art 25(1)(b)247
000118077

vs CILAG GMBH INTERNATIONAL

2023-03-22Art 25(1)(b)247
000117453

vs SHANGHAI TENGXIANG TRAVEL PRODUCTS CO.,LTD

2023-03-20Art 25(1)(b)247
000117372

vs Biovico Sp. z o.o.

2023-02-23Art 25(1)(b)247
000108861

vs Sofiane Lozano IBANEZ

2021-07-22Art 25(1)(b)247
000107461

vs CHANGCHUN XIA

2020-05-08Art 25(1)(b)247
000105480

vs FBGC Limited

2019-08-13Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)247