Nintendo patent update: new Joy-Con attachment and battle system - EU trade mark dispute: V12X

Nintendo patent update: new Joy-Con attachment and battle system 

Nintendo, the Japanese company behind popular franchises such as Mario, Zelda and Pokémon, has recently filed two new patents. While these are not primarily intended for litigation, they focus on ideas that are currently being developed. One aims to improve the experience of playing with a single controller, while the other describes a system designed to make certain video game battles more tactical. 

In 2023, Nintendo filed an international patent application for a detachable accessory for its controllers, which was published on 6 February 2025 as WO2025/027804 A1. The same patent has already entered Europe, where it was published as EP4691586A1 on 11 February 2026. The concept is simple. A magnetic attachment for the controller that makes the top buttons easier to reach when the controller is used horizontally as a single unit. This becomes particularly useful in shared play sessions, where each player uses half of a controller and the ergonomics are not ideal. This scenario is a perfect match for the typical use of the Switch 2 Joy-Cons, although Nintendo has not linked this patent to any specific product. 

The second patent relates to software. Published on 26 March 2026, U.S. application US2026/0084050A1 describes a battle system in which an ability that is either locked or on cooldown can be activated by consuming an additional resource. This adds an extra tactical dimension, as players must decide whether it is worth forcing a key action while accepting an additional cost. The application's illustrations depict a battle screen with several characters, status bars and skill icons, which is typical of Japanese role-playing games. Although some have linked it to series such as Xenoblade Chronicles, Nintendo has not confirmed any connection to a specific franchise. 

As is always the case with patents, none of these publications guarantees that these ideas will be developed into commercial products or video games. Nevertheless, it offers valuable insights into Nintendo's current areas of focus: improving player comfort by refining minor aspects of the controller and making its games more flexible and strategic by refining battle systems. 

EU trade mark dispute: V12X 

On 18 March 2026, in Case T-108/25, the General Court of the European Union ruled that the word mark “V12X” was invalid. This ruling addresses a recurring issue in trade mark law: how to determine whether a technical-looking alphanumeric combination functions as an indication of origin or merely describes the product. 

In May 2022, MAN Truck & Bus, which is known for its marine and stationary engines, registered the sign 'V12X' for Class 7 goods, including engines for boats, ships, and stationary applications, as well as parts and spare parts for these engines. However, its competitor Rolls-Royce Power Systems, a manufacturer of high-end engines marketed under the MTU brand, filed a declaration of invalidity, arguing that the mark was descriptive and lacked distinctive character. The EUIPO Cancellation Division initially rejected the request, but the Second Board of Appeal upheld it, declaring the mark invalid on the basis that the relevant public would identify 'V12X' with V12 engines with certain performance characteristics. MAN then brought an action before the General Court. 

Before addressing the case itself, MAN questioned the evidential value of the screenshots and web links submitted by Rolls-Royce, as well as the admissibility of documents filed for the first time during the appeal process. Both objections were dismissed by the Court. It noted that the Regulation does not stipulate a specific form of evidence, and that the mere possibility that a webpage may have been altered is insufficient to render it invalid, as concrete evidence of alteration is required. As for the evidence submitted on appeal, it was admitted because it was relevant, complemented the material already on file and addressed the Cancellation Division’s view that the descriptive meaning of the letter 'X' had not been sufficiently established. 

In terms of the case itself, the Court had no doubts about 'V12'. For the relevant public, namely professionals in the marine and stationary engine sector, this term directly refers to an engine with twelve cylinders arranged in a V configuration. This point is supported by technical data sheets and specialist publications submitted by Rolls-Royce. 

However, the more significant argument concerned the 'X'. MAN claimed that the letter had no clear descriptive meaning, so the mark as a whole should be upheld. The Court rejected this argument for a compelling reason. On its website, MAN itself explained that the 'X' referred to the 'next generation', 'extra displacement' and 'excellent power-to-weight ratio' of the engine. A party that builds the commercial narrative of a sign around its technical qualities cannot then argue that the public will not perceive it in the same way. 

This was reinforced by the fact that it was common practice in the market to combine 'V12' with letters or numbers to indicate engine performance or model variations, such as 'V12-1550' or 'V12 600 PS'. Therefore, the combination of both elements without a space did not create a fanciful expression, but rather a designation consistent with sectoral usage. As a result, the Court concluded that 'V12X' did not have a meaning that was new or independent of its components, and that the relevant public would therefore immediately perceive it as an indication of the product's characteristics rather than as an identifier of commercial origin. Once its descriptive nature was established under Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001, the decision to invalidate it was inevitable.