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

Judgment of the General Court of 19 December 2019 — Nosio v EUIPO (BIANCOFINO)

(Case T-54/19) (1)

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

(2020/C 61/42)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Nosio SpA (Mezzocorona, Italy) (represented by: J. Graffer and A. Ottolini, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 November 2018 (Case R 2434/2017-1), relating to an application for registration of the word sign BIANCOFINO as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Nosio SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 112, 25.3.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 17 October 2019 — United States Seafoods v EUIPO — (UNITED STATES SEAFOODS)

(Case T-10/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark UNITED STATES SEAFOODS - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 432/61)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: United States Seafoods LLC (Seattle, Washington, United States) (represented by: C. Spintig, S. Pietzcker and M. Prasse, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas and H. O’Neill, Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 October 2018 (Case R 817/2018-5), relating to the international registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark UNITED STATES SEAFOODS.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders United States Seafoods LLC to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by EUIPO.

(1) OJ C 93, 11.3.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 26 March 2020 — Wilhelm Sihn jr. v EUIPO — Golden Frog (CHAMELEON)

(Case T-312/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark CHAMELEON - Earlier international and national word marks CHAMELEON - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 175/24)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Wilhelm Sihn jr. GmbH & Co. KG (Niefern-Öschelbronn, Germany) (represented by: H. Twelmeier, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Golden Frog GmbH (Meggen, Switzerland) (represented by: G. Messenger, Barrister)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 March 2019 (Case R 1551/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Wilhelm Sihn jr. and Golden Frog.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Wilhelm Sihn jr. GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 11 February 2020 — Jakober v EUIPO (Shape of a cup)

(Case T-262/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of a cup - Inadmissibility of the appeal before the Board of Appeal)

(2020/C 95/37)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Philip Jakober (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: J. Klink, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 February 2019 (Case R 1153/2018-4) relating to an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a cup as an EU trade mark.

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 11 February 2019 (Case R 1153/2018-4);

2. Orders EUIPO to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 206, 17.6.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2020 — Divaro v EUIPO — Grendene (IPANEMA)

(Case T-288/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark IPANEMA - Earlier EU figurative mark Ipanema - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 215/50)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Divaro, SA (Oviedo, Spain) (represented by: M. Santos Quintana and M. A. Fernández Munárriz, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Grendene, SA (Sobral, Brazil)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 February 2019 (Case R 1785/2018-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Grendene and Divaro.

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 22 February 2019 (Case R 1785/2018-2) in so far as it dismissed the action of Divaro, SA for ‘protective glasses’ in Class 9;

2. Rejects the opposition for all the goods covered in the application for registration, except for ‘glasses (optical)’, ‘frames for the latter (lenses)’ and ‘sports glasses’ in Class 9;

3. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

4. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 2 April 2020 — Isigny-Sainte Mère v EUIPO (Shape of a golden container with a type of wave)

(Case T-546/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of a golden container with a type of wave - Absolute ground for refusal - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Lack of distinctive character)

(2020/C 191/15)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Isigny-Sainte Mère (Isigny-sur-Mer, France) (represented by: D. Mallo Saint-Jalmes, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 May 2019 (Case R 1513/2018-5), concerning an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign comprising the shape of a golden container with a type of wave as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

1. The action is dismissed;

2. Isigny-Sainte Mère is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 312, 16.9.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 June 2020 — L. Oliva Torras v EUIPO — Mecánica del Frío (Vehicle couplings)

(Case T-100/19) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a coupling to hitch refrigeration or air conditioning equipment to a motor vehicle - Single head of claim seeking alteration - Implicit application for annulment - Admissibility - Ground of invalidity - Failure to comply with the requirements for protection - Articles 4 to 9 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Extent of the examination carried out by the Board of Appeal - Position adopted by the Board of Appeal on the failure to comply with a requirement for protection during the procedure - Divergent conclusion in the contested decision - Obligation to state reasons - Article 62 and second sentence of Article 63(1) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

(2020/C 247/15)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: L. Oliva Torras, S.A. (Manresa, Spain) (represented by: E. Sugrañes Coca and M. D. Caballero Pérez, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: 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: Mecánica del Frío, S.L. (Cornellá de Llobregat, Spain) (represented by: J. Torras Toll, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 November 2018 (Case R 1397/2017-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between L. Oliva Torras and Mecánica del Frío.

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 19 November 2018 (Case R 1397/2017-3);

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by L. Oliva Torras, SA;

4. Orders Mecánica del Frío, SL, to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 139, 15.4.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2020 — View. v EUIPO (CREATE DELIGHTFUL HUMAN ENVIRONMENTS)

(Case T-49/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark CREATE DELIGHTFUL HUMAN ENVIRONMENTS - Trade mark consisting of an advertising slogan - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 215/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: View, Inc. (Milpitas, Delaware, United States) (represented by: G. Tritton, Barrister)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 November 2018 (Case R 1625/2018-2), concerning the international registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark CREATE DELIGHTFUL HUMAN ENVIRONMENTS.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders View, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 103, 18.3.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Artur Florêncio & Filhos, Affsports v EUIPO — Anadeco Gestion (sflooring)

(Case T-533/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark sflooring - Earlier national word mark T-FLOORING - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2020/C 339/20)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Artur Florêncio & Filhos, Affsports Lda (Sintra, Portugal) (represented by: D. Martins Pereira Soares, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Anadeco Gestion, SA (Cartagena, Spain) (represented by: J. Erdozain Lopez and J. Galan Lopez, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 May 2019 (Case R 1870/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Anadeco Gestion and Artur Florêncio & Filhos, Affsports.

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 20 May 2019 (Case R 1870/2018-4);

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO and Anadeco Gestion, SA to bear their own costs and each to pay half of the costs incurred by Artur Florêncio & Filhos, Affsports Lda before the General Court and the Board of Appeal.

(1) OJ C 312, 16.9.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 25 June 2020 — Brands Up v EUIPO (Credit24)

(Case T-651/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark Credit24 - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 271/47)

Language of the case: Finnish

Parties

Applicant: Brands UP OÜ (Tallinn, Estonia) (represented by: M. Welin, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 July 2019 (Case R 465/2019-2), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign Credit24 as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Brands UP OÜ to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Pshonka v Council

(Case T-291/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Council’s obligation to verify that the decision of an authority of a third State was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection)

(2020/C 390/41)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Viktor Pavlovych Pshonka (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by M. Mleziva, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by R. Pekař and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/354 of 4 March 2019 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2019 L 64, p. 7) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/352 of 4 March 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2019 L 64, p. 1), in so far as those acts maintain the applicant’s name on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/354 of 4 March 2019 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/352 of 4 March 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as the name of Mr Viktor Pavlovych Pshonka was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 246, 22.7.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 July 2020 — Itinerant Show Room v EUIPO — Save the Duck (FAKE DUCK)

(Case T-371/19) (1)

(European Union trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark FAKE DUCK - Earlier EU figurative mark FAKE DUCK - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Relevant public - Similarity of the goods and services - Similarity of the signs - Global assessment of the likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 371/07)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Itinerant Show Room Srl (San Giorgio in Bosco, Italy) (represented by: A. Visentin, M. Cartella and B. Cartella, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Save the Duck SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: M. De Vietro, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 April 2019 (Case R 1117/2018-1), concerning opposition proceedings between Forest Srl and Itinerant Show Room.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Itinerant Show Room to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 263, 5.8.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — PE Digital v EUIPO — Spark Networks Services (ElitePartner)

(Case T-36/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Figurative EU trade mark ElitePartner - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons)

(2020/C 399/43)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: PE Digital GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Spark Networks Services GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: C. Brennecke and J. Gräbig, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 October 2018 (Case R 614/2017-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Spark Networks Services and PE Digital.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders PE Digital GmbH to pay the costs, including those incurred by Spark Networks Services GmbH in the proceedings before the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 93, 11. 3. 2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Basaglia v Commission

(Case T-727/19) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents concerning certain projects in the context of the eTEN programme and of the fifth and sixth framework programmes for research and technological development - Restriction of the request for access - Partial refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual - Exception relating to the protection of the commercial interests of a third party - Overriding public interest - Obligation to carry out a specific and individual examination)

(2020/C 390/50)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Giorgio Basaglia (Milan, Italy) (represented by: G. Balossi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Ehrbar and A. Spina, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 6474 final of 4 September 2019 concerning a confirmatory application for access to documents pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. annuls Commission Decision C(2019) 6474 final of 4 September 2019 concerning a confirmatory application for access to documents pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, in so far as it includes a restriction of the request for access and in so far as it includes a refusal to grant access based on the first indent of Article 4(2) of that regulation;

2. dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. orders Giorgio Basaglia and the European Commission each to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 432, 23.12.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 28 October 2020 — Electrolux Home Products v EUIPO — D. Consult (FRIGIDAIRE)

(Case T-583/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark FRIGIDAIRE - Genuine use - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 9/23)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Electrolux Home Products, Inc. (Charlotte, North Carolina, United States) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: D. Consult (Wattignies, France)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 June 2019 (Case R 166/2018-5), relating to revocation proceedings between D. Consult and Electrolux Home Products.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Electrolux Home Products, Inc., to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 348, 14.10.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2020 — X-cen-tek v EUIPO — Altenloh, Brinck & Co. (PAX)

(Case T-847/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark PAX - Earlier EU and international figurative marks SPAX - Relative ground for refusal - Dominant element - No counteraction - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Application of the law ratione temporis)

(2020/C 433/60)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: X-cen-tek GmbH & Co. KG (Wardenburg, Germany) (represented by: H. Hillers, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Altenloh, Brinck & Co. GmbH & Co. KG (Ennepetal, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 September 2019 (Case R 2324/2018-2) regarding opposition proceedings between Altenloh, Brinck & Co. and X-cen-tek.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders X-cen-tek GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 25 November 2020 — Impera v EUIPO — Euro Games Technology (Flaming Forties)

(Case T-875/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark Flaming Forties - Earlier national figurative mark 40 FLAMING FRUITS - 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 28/68)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Impera GmbH (Steinhaus, Austria) (represented by: C. Straberger, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: I. Lecheva, J. Crespo Carrillo and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Euro Games Technology Ltd (Vranya-Lozen-Triugulnika, Bulgaria) (represented by: K. Manev, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 October 2019 (Case R 2321/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Euro Games Technology and Impera.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Impera GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 25 November 2020 — UI v Commission

(Case T-362/19) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Expatriation allowance - Article 4(1)(a) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations - Refusal to grant the expatriation allowance - Habitual residence - Place where the person’s main occupation is carried on - Five-year reference period)

(2021/C 28/61)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: UI (represented by: J. Diaz Cordova, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Bohr and A.-C. Simon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 270 TFEU for (i) annulment of the decision of the Commission’s Office for the Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO) of 27 August 2018 refusing to grant the applicant the expatriation allowance and (ii) compensation for the harm that the applicant claims to have suffered as a result.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders UI to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 305, 9.9.2019.