ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Order of the President of the General Court of 26 May 2021 — OHB System v Commission

(Case T-54/21 R)

(Interim relief - Public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts - Procurement of Galileo transition satellites - Rejection of a tender - Application for interim measures - Prima facie case - Urgency - Balancing of competing interests)

(2021/C 278/67)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: OHB System AG (Bremen, Germany) (represented by: W. Würfel and F. Hausmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Wilms, J. Estrada de Solà, L. Mantl and L. André, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 278 TFEU for, first, suspension of the operation of the decisions of the European Space Agency (ESA) of 19 and 22 January 2021, acting in the name and on behalf of the Commission, to reject the applicant’s tender for public contract 2018/S 091-206089 and to award that public contract to two other tenderers, and, second, for the Commission to be ordered to provide access to the tender documentation.

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim relief is dismissed.

2. The orders of 31 January 2021, OHB System v Commission (T-54/21 R), and of 26 February 2021, OHB System v Commission (T-54/21 R), are set aside.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the General Court of 25 October 2021 — Troy Chemical Company and Troy v Commission

(Case T-297/21 R)

(Interim measures - Biocidal products - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/348 - Approval of carbendazim as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 7 (film preservatives) and 10 (masonry preservatives) - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency)

(2021/C 513/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Troy Chemical Company BV (Delft, Netherlands), Troy Corp. (Florham Park, New Jersey, United States) (represented by: D. Abrahams, H. Widemann and L. Gorywoda, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lindenthal and M. Farley, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU seeking, first, suspension of operation of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/348 of 25 February 2021 approving carbendazim as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 7 and 10 (OJ 2021 L 68, p. 174), and, second, the grant of any other interim measures which the General Court considers appropriate.

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 27 August 2021 — PJ v EIT

(Case T-335/21) (1)

(2021/C 431/69)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 310, 2.8.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 2 December 2021 — FC v EASO

(Case T-303/21) (1)

(Action for annulment - Civil Service - Temporary staff - Disciplinary proceedings - Applications for suspension - Summons to attend a hearing before the Disciplinary Board - Postponement of the date of the hearing - No act adversely affecting the applicant - Premature action - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2022/C 95/51)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: FC (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Asylum Support Office (represented by: P. Eyckmans and M. Stamatopoulou, acting as Agents, and by T. Bontinck, A. Guillerme and L. Burguin, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the act adopted by the Chair of the Disciplinary Board of EASO on [confidential] by which the applicant’s hearing in the disciplinary proceedings initiated against her was fixed for [confidential].

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

2. FC shall pay her own costs and those incurred by the European Asylum Support Office (EASO).

(1) OJ C 289, 19.7.2021.
Order of the General Court of 9 November 2021 — Amort and Others v Commission

(Case T-96/21) (1)

(Action for annulment - Medicinal products for human use - Conditional marketing authorisation for the medicinal product for human use ‘Comirnaty — COVID-19 mRNA (nucleoside-modified) vaccine’ - No legal interest in bringing proceedings - No direct concern - No individual concern - Non-regulatory act - Inadmissibility)

(2022/C 24/52)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Heidi Amort (Jenesien, Italy) and the 35 other applicants whose names are set out in the annex to the order (represented by: R. Holzeisen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B.-R. Killman and A. Sipos, as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of European Commission Implementing Decision C(2020) 9598 (final) of 21 December 2020, granting a conditional marketing authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council for ‘Comirnaty — COVID-19 mRNA (nucleoside-modified) vaccine’, a medicinal product for human use, as amended and supplemented.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. There is no longer a need to adjudicate on the applications to intervene submitted by Roberta Riccio and Alessandra Rizzotto, by Gheorghe Piperea, by TN, by TF, TG, TH and TI, by Jean Gouezo and the other persons whose names are set out in Annex II, by VV, by Stefano Del Gaudio and the other persons whose names are set out in Annex II, by TO, TP and TQ, by TR and the other persons whose names are set out in Annex II, by VH and the other persons whose names are set out in Annex II, by Dieter Achtschin and the other persons whose names are set out in Annex II, by VW, and by BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH and Pfizer Inc.

3. Ms Heidi Amort and the other persons whose names are set out in Annex I are ordered to pay the costs.

4. Roberta Riccio and Alessandra Rizzotto, Gheorghe Piperea, TN, TF, TG, TH and TI, Jean Gouezo and the other persons whose names are set out in Annex II, VV, Stefano Del Gaudio and the other persons whose names are set out in Annex II, TO, TP and TQ, TR and the other persons whose names are set out in Annex II, VH and the other persons whose names are set out in Annex II, Dieter Achtschin and the other persons whose names are set out in Annex II, VW and BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH and Pfizer Inc. shall each bear their own costs relating to the applications to intervene.

(1) OJ C 148, 26.4.21.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the General Court of 7 February 2022 — Eurecna v Commission

(Case T-739/21 R)

(Interim relief - Public supply contracts - Application for interim measures - Lack of any urgency)

(2022/C 148/36)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Eurecna SpA (Venice, Italy) (represented by: R Sciaudone, lawyer)

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

Re:

Application under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU seeking, first, the suspension of the operation of the decisions of the Commission of 10, 16 and 30 September 2021 to impose a set-off of claims on the applicant and, secondly, to order the Commission to pay the relevant amounts to the applicant.

Operative part of the order

1. The application for temporary interim relief is dismissed.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the General Court of 22 December 2021 — Civitta Eesti v Commission

(Case T-665/21 R)

(Interim relief - Public supply contracts - Legal, socio-economic and technical assistance in the fields of energy and mobility and transport - Application for interim measures - No urgency)

(2022/C 119/68)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Civitta Eesti AS (Tartu, Estonia) (represented by: C. Ginter, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. André and S. Romoli, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Articles 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU to suspend the operation of the decision of the Commission of 12 October 2021 rejecting the applicant’s tender for Lot 5 of tendering procedure MOVE/2020/OP/0008, suspend the signature of the contracts to be concluded between the Commission and the other tenderers for Lot 5 of that procedure and, where appropriate, suspend the operation of those contracts.

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed.

2. The order of 22 October 2021, Civitta Eesti v Commission (T-665/21 R), is revoked.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 28 March 2022 — El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — Rimex Trading (UNK UNIK)

(Case T-144/21) (1)

(2022/C 213/68)

Language of the case: Spanish

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 163, 3.5.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 15 March 2022 — Growth Finance Plus v EUIPO (catlover)

(Case T-115/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation of the contested decision - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)

(2022/C 198/71)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Growth Finance Plus AG (Gommiswald, Switzerland) (represented by: H. Twelmeier, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 November 2020 (Case R 717/2020-1), relating to an application for registration of the word sign catlover as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 6 April 2022 — Leinfelder Uhren München v EUIPO — Schafft (Representation of a geometric figure)

(Case T-375/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Withdrawal of the application for revocation - No need to adjudicate)

(2022/C 266/34)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Leinfelder Uhren München GmbH & Co. KG (Munich, Germany) (represented by: S. Lüft, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Nicolás Gómez and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Thomas Schafft (Munich, Germany) (represented by: V. Sandulache, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 March 2021 (Joined Cases R 1931/2018-2 and R 1936/2018-2), relating to revocation proceedings between Thomas Schafft and Leinfelder Uhren München.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. Thomas Schafft shall bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 329, 16.8.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Sunshine Smile v EUIPO (PlusDental+)

(Case T-265/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation of the contested decision - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)

(2022/C 237/67)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Sunshine Smile GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: D. Weller and V. Wolf, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 March 2021 (Case R 1834/2020-2), relating to an application for registration of the figurative sign PlusDental+ as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 263, 5.7.2021.
Order of the General Court of 13 April 2022 — Alauzun and Others v Commission

(Case T-695/21) (1)

(Action for annulment and for failure to act - Public health - Medicinal products for human use - Conditional marketing authorisation for mRNA-technology vaccines - Lack of carcinogenicity and genotoxicity studies - Time limit for bringing proceedings - Delay - No invitation to act - Position taken - No interest in bringing proceedings - Lack of direct concern - Lack of individual concern - Inadmissibility - Request for the Court to issue directions - Lack of jurisdiction)

(2022/C 284/56)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Virginie Alauzun (Saint Cannat, France) and the 773 other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to the order (represented by: F. Di Vizio, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Gattinara and L. Haasbeek, acting as Agents)

Re:

By their action under Articles 263, 265 and 266 TFEU, the applicants ask the General Court (i) to declare that the European Commission unlawfully failed to include carcinogenicity and genotoxicity testing in the preclinical phase during the procedure granting the conditional marketing authorisation to mRNA-technology vaccines, (ii) to order the Commission to include such testing in past and future EMA procedures and (iii) to request the EMA to communicate certain information relating to that testing.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for leave to intervene submitted by Moderna Biotech Spain SL.

3. Ms Virginie Alauzun and the other applicants whose names are included in the annex shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

4. Moderna Biotech Spain shall bear its own costs relating to the application to intervene.

(1) OJ C 2, 3.1.2022
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 6 May 2022 — documentus Deutschland v EUIPO — Reisswolf (REISSWOLF)

(Case T-374/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Withdrawal of the application for a declaration of invalidity - No need to adjudicate)

(2022/C 284/45)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: documentus Deutschland GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: D. Weller, V. Wolf, A. Wulff and K. Schmidt-Hern, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: T. Klee and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Reisswolf Akten- und Datenvernichtung GmbH & Co. KG (Hamburg) (represented by: A. Ebert-Weidenfeller and H. Förster, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 March 2021 (Case R 2354/2019-1), concerning invalidity proceedings between documentus Deutschland and Reisswolf Akten- und Datenvernichtung.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. documentus Deutschland GmbH and Reisswolf Akten- und Datenvernichtung GmbH & Co. KG shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 329, 16.8.2021
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 2 August 2022 — Kakuzo v EUIPO — Rauch Fruchtsäfte (Kakuzo)

(Case T-592/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)

(2022/C 398/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Kakuzo GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: O. Spieker, A. Schönfleisch and D. Mienert, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: I. Harrington and D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Rauch Fruchtsäfte GmbH (Rankweil, Austria)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 8 July 2021 (Case R 356/2021-5)

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. Kakuzo GmbH shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 502, 13.12.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 28 June 2022 — Compass Tex v EUIPO (Trusted Handwork)

(Case T-704/21) (1)

(Action for annulment - EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark Trusted Handwork - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2022/C 318/50)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Compass Tex Ltd (Tsuen Wan, Hong Kong, China) (represented by: M. Gail, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: T. Klee and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 August 2021 (Case R 0034/2021-5), relating to an application for registration of the word sign Trusted Handwork as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Compass Tex Ltd shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 2, 3.1.2022.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 22 November 2022 — Fieldpoint (Cyprus) v EUIPO (HYPERLIGHTEYEWEAR)

(Case T-801/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark HYPERLIGHTEYEWEAR - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Equal treatment - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2023/C 35/77)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Fieldpoint (Cyprus) LTD (Nicosia, Cyprus) (represented by: P. Rath and S. Gebele, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Lapinskaite and T. Klee, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 6 October 2021 (Case R 1165/2021-2).

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Fieldpoint (Cyprus) LTD shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 73, 14.2.2022.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 19 September 2022 — TDK Foil Italy v Commission

(Case T-788/21) (1)

(Action for annulment - Commercial policy - Dumping - Imports of aluminium flat-rolled products originating in China - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Independent importer - No individual concern - Inadmissibility)

(2022/C 463/69)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: TDK Foil Italy SpA (Rozzano, Italy) (represented by: F. Di Gianni, A. Scalini and G. Pregno, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Luengo and M. Gustafsson, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1784 of 8 October 2021 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of aluminium flat-rolled products originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2021 L 359, p. 6), in so far as that regulation includes raw aluminium foil used to produce high-voltage anode and tab foils for aluminium electrolytic capacitors within the scope of the anti-dumping duty.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. TDK Foil Italy SpA shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 84, 21.2.2022.
Order of the President of the General Court of 21 June 2022 — Ismailova v Council

(Case T-234/22 R)

(Interim Relief - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in respect of Russia’s actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine - Freezing of funds - Application for interim measures - No urgency - Balancing of interests)

(2022/C 303/62)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Gulbakhor Ismailova (Tachkent, Uzbekistan) (represented by: J. Grand d’Esnon, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Dreissen and A. Vitro, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her application under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU, the applicant seeks, in essence, suspension of operation of, first, two acts by which the criteria for inclusion on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to restrictive measures on the basis of their involvement in actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine was amended and, second, two acts by which her name was added to that list. Specifically, the applicant seeks, first, the suspension of operation of Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/582 of 8 April 2022 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 110, p. 55), in so far as that act concerns her, of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/581 of 8 April 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 110, p. 3), in so far as that act concerns her, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/329 of 25 February 2022 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 50, p. 1), and of Council Regulation (EU) 2022/330 of 25 February 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 51, p. 1); second, in the alternative, suspension of operation of Decision 2022/581 in so far as that act concerns her, of Article 1(2)(f) and (g) of Decision 2022/329 and of Article 1(1)(f) and (g) of Regulation 2022/330; and, third, that the Council of the European Union be ordered to pay her the sum of EUR 20 000 in respect of the costs which she incurred for defending her interests.

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim relief is dismissed.
Order of the President of the General Court of 31 March 2022 — AL v Council

(Case T-22/22 R)

(Interim relief - Civil service - Officials - Disciplinary proceedings - Removal from post - Application for interim measures - Urgency - Prima facie case - Weighing of interests)

(2022/C 213/56)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: AL (represented by: R. Rata, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and M. Alver, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU for, first, suspension of operation of the decision of the Council of 27 September 2021 imposing on the applicant the disciplinary penalty of removal from post with effect from 1 October 2021 and, second, reinstatement of the applicant as an official in his previous post and position.

Operative part of the order

1. The operation of the decision of the Council of the European Union of 27 September 2021 imposing on the applicant the disciplinary penalty of removal from post is suspended with effect from 1 October 2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 29 August 2022 — Mellish v Commission

(Case T-176/22) (1)

(2022/C 398/45)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 222, 7.6.2022.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 13 July 2022 — Dado Ceramica and Others v EUIPO — Italcer (Tiles)

(Case T-40/22) (1)

(2022/C 340/79)

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the Ninth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 128, 21.3.2022.