Invalidity · first instance · 2023-11-10
000120158
Contested design: 001084784-0001
Outcome
The application for a declaration of invalidity is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
1. Der Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung des eingetragenen Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmusters 001084784-0001 wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten der Inhaberin, die auf 400 EUR festgesetzt werden.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Penny & Giles Controls Limitedvia PDF extraction
United Kingdom (GB)
15 Airfield Road, Christchurch, Dorset BH23 3TJ, Vereinigtes Königreich
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
elobau GmbH & Co. KG
Germany (DE)
Zeppelinstr. 44, 88299 Leutkirch, Deutschland
Represented by
Prior art cited (4)
joystick control grip
US D479,239 S · US Design Patent register extract · disclosed 2003-09-02
joystick control grip
US 6,741,233 B1 · US patent register extract · disclosed 2004-05-25
joystick control grip
EP 1 259 862 B1 · European patent register extract · disclosed 2001-09-07
product datasheet showing multifunction joystick grips
DeltaTech MFG - multifunction grips for Joysticks · DeltaTech MFG product datasheet
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant argued that the contested joystick control-grip design lacked novelty and individual character in light of D1 to D4 and a crowded prior art field.
- ›The holder replied that the contested design was new and had individual character because the cited earlier designs showed sufficient differences.
- ›The Division accepted D1 to D4 as disclosed prior art, identified the informed user as a user familiar with control grips, and found at least average designer freedom.
- ›It held that the shape of the grip back, head, operating surfaces, and button arrangements created a different overall impression, so the invalidity application was rejected.
Deciding panel
- MemberNatascha GALPERIN
- MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
- MemberWolfgang SCHRAMEK
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deGerman | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000128826 vs Shenzhen Lireder Industrial Co., Ltd. | 2025-08-18 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 7 |
| 000120579 vs Lohia e-mobility GmbH | 2025-03-12 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 7 |
| 000120480 vs VER PLAST S.r.l. | 2023-11-13 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 7 |
| 000120410 vs VER PLAST S.r.l. | 2023-11-10 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 7 |
| 000120409 vs VER PLAST S.r.l. | 2023-11-10 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 7 |
| 000118721 vs HANGZHOU CHIC INTELLIGENT TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD | 2023-10-16 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 7 |
| 000118758 vs HANGZHOU CHIC INTELLIGENT TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD | 2023-10-16 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 7 |
| 000118360 vs Wang-Chuan CHEN | 2023-08-03 | — | Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 7 |