ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 March 2020 — Gwo Chyang Biotech v EUIPO — Norma (KinGirls)

(Case T-85/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark KinGirls - Earlier German word mark King - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 175/22)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Gwo Chyang Biotech Co. Ltd (Tainan City, Taiwan) (represented by: J. Kakoures, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: W. Schramek, A. Söder and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Norma Lebensmittelfilialbetrieb Stiftung & Co. KG (Nuremberg, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 December 2018 (Case R 718/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Norma Lebensmittelfilialbetrieb Stiftung & Co. and Gwo Chyang Biotech.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Gwo Chyang Biotech Co. Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 122, 1.4.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2020 — Bog-Fran v EUIPO — Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ (Furniture)

(Case T-159/19) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing an item of furniture - Ground for invalidity - No individual character - Disclosure of the earlier design - Proof of disclosure - Article 7 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

(2020/C 114/04)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Bog-Fran sp. z o.o. sp.k. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: M. Mikosza, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ S.A. (Ostrów Mazowiecka, Poland) (represented by: H. Basiński, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 January 2019 (Case R 291/2018-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Bog-Fran and Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 January 2019 (Case R 291/2018-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Bog-Fran sp. z o.o. sp.k. and Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ S.A.;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Bog-Fran;

4. Orders Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 155, 6.5.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2020 — Koenig & Bauer v EUIPO (we’re on it)

(Case T-156/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark we’re on it - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Trade mark consisting of an advertising slogan - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2020/C 215/47)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Koenig & Bauer AG (Wurzbourg, Germany) (represented by: B. Reinisch, B. Sorg and M. Ringer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Graul and A. Söder, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 January 2019 (Case R 1027/2018-1), relating to an application for registration of the word sign we’re on it as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Koenig & Bauer AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 148, 29.4.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 29 April 2020 — Abarca v EUIPO — Abanca Corporación Bancaria (ABARCA SEGUROS)

(Case T-106/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark ABARCA SEGUROS - Earlier EU word mark ABANCA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 209/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Abarca — Companhia de Seguros SA (Lisbon, Portugal) (represented by: J. Pimenta and Á. Pinho, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Schneider, J. Crespo Carrillo and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Abanca Corporación Bancaria, SA (Betanzos, Spain) (represented by: M. Aznar Alonso, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 November 2018 (Case R 1370/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Abanca Corporación Bancaria and Abarca — Companhia de Seguros.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Abarca — Companhia de Seguros SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Abanca Corporación Bancaria, SA.

(1) OJ C 131, 8.4.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 25 June 2020 — Serviceplan Gruppe für innovative Kommunikation v EUIPO (Serviceplan Solutions)

(Case T-380/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark Serviceplan Solutions - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons - First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2020/C 262/30)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Serviceplan Gruppe für innovative Kommunikation GmbH & Co. KG (Munich, Germany) (represented by: B. Koch and P. Schmitz, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 March 2019 (Case R 1427/2018-5) concerning an application for registration of the word sign Serviceplan Solutions as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Serviceplan Gruppe für innovative Kommunikation GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 270, 12.8.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 28 May 2020 — Martínez Albainox v EUIPO — Taser International (TASER)

(Case T-341/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark TASER - Earlier EU word marks TASER - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Detriment to reputation - Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier trade mark - Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2020/C 230/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Martínez Albainox, SL (Albacete, Spain) (represented by: J. Carbonell Callicó, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Taser International, Inc. (Scottsdale, Arizona, United States)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 March 2019 (Case R 1577/2018-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Taser International and Martínez Albainox.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Martínez Albainox, SL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 255, 29.7.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Teva Pharmaceutical Industries v EUIPO (Moins de migraine pour vivre mieux)

(Case T-696/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark Moins de migraine pour vivre mieux - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 339/24)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd (Petah Tikva, Israel) (represented by: J. Bogatz and Y. Stone, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 August 2019 (Case R 778/2019-5), relating to an application for registration of the word sign Moins de migraine pour vivre mieux as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 413, 9.12.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Pablosky v EUIPO — docPrice (mediFLEX easystep)

(Case T-20/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark mediFLEX easystep - Earlier EU figurative mark Stepeasy - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 313/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Pablosky, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: M. Centell, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, H. O’Neill and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: docPrice GmbH (Koblenz, Germany) (represented by: K. Landes, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 November 2018 (Case R 77/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Pablosky and docPrice.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 8 November 2018 (Case R 77/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Pablosky, SL and docPrice GmbH, in so far as it concerns ‘clothing’ and ‘headgear’ in Class 25 of the Nice Agreement;

2. Dismisses the appeal which docPrice brought before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO in so far as it concerns the goods referred to in point 1;

3. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

4. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 82, 4.3.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Tetra v EUIPO — Neusta next (Wave)

(Case T-869/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark Wave - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2020/C 390/53)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Tetra GmbH (Melle, Germany) (represented by: E. Kessler, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Eberl and A. Söder, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Neusta next GmbH & Co. KG (Bremen, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 October 2019 (Case R 2440/2018-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between Neusta next and Tetra.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 4 October 2019 (Case R 2440/2018-2);

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 61, 24.2.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2020 — Kludi v EUIPO — Adlon Brand (ADLON)

(Case T-144/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark ADLON - Earlier EU word mark ADLON - Proof of the reputation of the earlier mark - Rule 19 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 7 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625) - Temporal application of the law - Late submission of documents - Board of Appeal’s discretion - Article 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Relative ground for refusal - Damage to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier trade mark)

(2020/C 378/35)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Kludi GmbH & Co. KG (Menden, Germany) (represented by: A. Zafar, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Fischer and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Adlon Brand GmbH & Co. KG (Düren, Germany) (represented by: P. Baronikians, E. Saarmann and N. Dimmler, lawyers)

Re

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 November 2018 (Case R 1500/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Adlon Brand and Kludi.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Kludi GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 139, 15.4.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2020 — SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler v EUIPO — Laboratorios Ern (apiheal)

(Case T-53/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark apiheal - Earlier national word mark APIRETAL - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity between the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2020/C 423/50)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler Sanayi Ve Ticaret AŞ (Istanbul, Turkey) (represented by: M. López Camba, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Laboratorios Ern, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: S. Correa Rodríguez, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 November 2018 (Case R 1725/2017-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Laboratorios Ern and SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler Sanayi Ve Ticaret.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 19 November 2018 (Case R 1725/2017-4) as regards ‘Pharmaceutical and veterinary preparations for medical purposes; chemical preparations for medical and veterinary purposes, chemical reagents for pharmaceutical and veterinary purposes; dietary supplements for pharmaceutical and veterinary purposes; dietary supplements; nutritional supplements; medical preparations for slimming purposes; food for babies; herbs and herbal beverages adapted for medicinal purposes; herbal supplements; herbal creams for medical purposes; herbal creams for medical use; herbal teas for medicinal purposes; liquid herbal supplements; teeth filling material, dental impression material, dental adhesives and material for repairing teeth; sanitary preparations for medical use; hygienic pads; hygienic tampons; plasters; materials for dressings; diapers, including those made of paper and textiles; fungicides; disinfectants; antiseptics; detergents for medical purposes’ in Class 5 and ‘bee glue for human consumption, propolis, propolis for human consumption’ in Class 30;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler Sanayi Ve Ticaret AŞ;

4. Orders Laboratorios Ern, SA to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 103, 18.3.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Fundación Tecnalia Research & Innovation v Commission

(Case T-314/19) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Grant agreement concluded in the framework of the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) - Development and testing of sensor systems for quality and performance control in baking processes - Bread-Guard Project - Overlap of the project with another project financed under the same programme - Changes to the description of the tasks to be undertaken - Loss of the intellectual property rights required for the execution of the project - Overestimation of the number of people needed each month for the project - Beneficiaries’ duty to provide information - Serious misconduct - Termination by the Commission of the grant agreement)

(2020/C 399/45)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Fundación Tecnalia Research & Innovation (San Sebastián, Spain) (represented by: P. Palacios Pesquera and M. Rius Coma, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Estrada de Solà and S. Izquierdo Pérez, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 272 TFEU seeking a declaration that the Commission was not justified in terminating the grant agreement relating to the FP7-KBBE-2013-7-613647 BreadGuard Project

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Fundación Tecnalia Research & Innovation to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 230, 8.7.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2020 — Topcart v EUIPO — Carl International (TC CARL)

(Case T-377/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark TC CARL - Earlier national figurative mark CARL TOUCH - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 19/48)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Topcart GmbH (Wiesbaden, Germany) (represented by: M. Hoffmann, lawyer)

Defendant: European Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Carl International (Limonest, France) (represented by: B. Müller, lawyer)

Re

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 April 2019 (Case R 1826/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Carl International and Topcart.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Topcart GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 270, 12.8.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2020 — Coppo Gavazzi and Others v Parliament

(Joined Cases T-389/19 to T-394/19, T-397/19, T-398/19, T-403/19, T-404/19, T-406/19, T-407/19, T-409/19 to T-414/19, T-416/19 to T-418/19, T-420/19 to T-422/19, T-425/19 to T-427/19, T-429/19 to T-432/19, T-435/19, T-436/19, T-438/19 to T-442/19, T-444/19 to T-446/19, T-448/19, T-450/19 to T-454/19, T-463/19 and T-465/19) (1)

(Institutional law - Single statute for Members of the European Parliament - Members of the European Parliament elected in Italian constituencies - Adoption by the Ufficio di Presidenza della Camera dei deputati (Office of the President of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, Italy) of Decision No 14/2018, on pensions - Change in the amount of the pensions of members of the Italian national parliament - Consequential change by the European Parliament in the amount of the pensions of certain former Members of the European Parliament elected in Italy - Competence of the authority which adopted the measure - Obligation to state reasons - Acquired rights - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations - Right to property - Proportionality - Equal treatment)

(2020/C 443/24)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicants: Maria Teresa Coppo Gavazzi (Milan, Italy) and the 48 other applicants whose names are annexed to the judgment (represented by: M. Merola, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: S. Seyr and S. Alves, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the notes of 11 April 2019 and, with respect to the applicant in Case T-465/19, of that of 11 June 2019, drawn up, in the case of each of the applicants, by the Parliament and concerning the adjustment of the amount earned by the applicants after the entry into force, on 1 January 2019, of Decision No 14/2018 of the Ufficio di Presidenza della Camera dei deputati.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action in Case T-453/19, Panusa v Parliament as inadmissible;

2. Dismisses the other actions;

3. Orders Ms Maria Teresa Coppo Gavazzi and the other applicants whose names are annexed to the judgment to bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Parliament.

(1) OJ C 270, 12.8.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2020 — Ace of spades v EUIPO — Krupp and Borrmann (JC JEAN CALL Champagne PRESTIGE)

(Case T-622/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the three-dimensional EU trade mark JC JEAN CALL Champagne PRESTIGE - Earlier three-dimensional EU trade marks - Relative grounds for refusal - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No damage to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2021/C 35/59)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ace of spades Holdings LLC (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: A. Gómez López, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Gerhard Ernst Krupp (Munich, Germany), Elmar Borrmann (Reith, Austria)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 June 2019 (Case R 3/2019-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Ace of spades Holdings and Messrs Krupp and Borrmann.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 26 June 2019 (Case R 3/2019-5) in so far as it dismissed the appeal brought by Ace of spades Holdings LLC and rejected the opposition based on Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 25 November 2020 — Kisscolor Living v EUIPO — Teoxane (KISS COLOR)

(Case T-802/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark KISS COLOR - Earlier EU word mark KISS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Temporal application of the law)

(2021/C 28/65)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Kisscolor Living GmbH (Bad Homburg, Germany) (represented by: T. Büttner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Söder, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Teoxane SA (Geneva, Switzerland)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 September 2019 (Case R 2167/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Teoxane and Kisscolor Living.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Kisscolor Living GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.2020.