do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-126/22: Action brought on 7 March 2022 — Coinbase v EUIPO — Coinbase Global (coinbase)
Date: 2022-03-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, education, exchange transaction, financial services, foreign exchange market, investment company, newspaper, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, virtual currency








C_2022171EN.01004301.xml










25.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/43






Action brought on 7 March 2022 — Coinbase v EUIPO — Coinbase Global (coinbase)
(Case T-126/22)
(2022/C 171/59)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Coinbase, Inc. (San Francisco, California, United States) (represented by: A. Nordemann, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Coinbase Global OÜ (Tallinn, Estonia)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark coinbase — Application for registration No 18 090 762

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 December 2021 in Case R 1097/2021-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) 2021/953 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2021 on a framework for the issuance, verification and acceptance of interoperable COVID-19 vaccination, test and recovery certificates (EU Digital COVID Certificate) to facilitate free movement during the COVID-19 pandemic (Official Journal of the European Union L 211 of 15 June 2021)
Date: 2022-03-07
Institutions: Council of the European Union, European Parliament
Subjects: EU national, border control, coronavirus disease, epidemic, free movement of persons, health certificate, health control, internal border of the EU, technical specification, vaccination




L_2022072EN.01000701.xml










7.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 72/7







Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) 2021/953 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2021 on a framework for the issuance, verification and acceptance of interoperable COVID-19 vaccination, test and recovery certificates (EU Digital COVID Certificate) to facilitate free movement during the COVID-19 pandemic

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 211 of 15 June 2021
)


On page 20, Article 13, paragraph 2:
for:


‘2.   Either the European Parliament or the Council may object to a delegated act in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 11(6). In such a case, the Commission shall repeal the act immediately following the notification of the decision to object by the European Parliament or by the Council.’,


read:


‘2.   Either the European Parliament or the Council may object to a delegated act in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 12(6). In such a case, the Commission shall repeal the act immediately following the notification of the decision to object by the European Parliament or by the Council.’.
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/363 of 2 January 2022 amending and correcting Annex IX to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/405 as regards the lists of third countries or regions thereof authorised for the entry into the Union of certain fishery products (Official Journal of the European Union L 69 of 4 March 2022)
Date: 2022-03-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aquaculture, fish product, fishery product, food inspection, foodstuff, health control, human nutrition, import (EU), originating product, third country








L_2022072EN.01000801.xml










7.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 72/8







Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/363 of 24 January 2022 amending and correcting Annex IX to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/405 as regards the lists of third countries or regions thereof authorised for the entry into the Union of certain fishery products

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 69 of 4 March 2022
)


On page 40, title, date of adoption, and on page 42, in the signature:
for:


                  ‘
                  24 January 2022
                  ’,

read:


                  ‘
                  2 March 2022
                  ’.
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/364 of 2 March 2022 amending Annexes V and XIV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/404 as regards the entries for Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States in the lists of third countries authorised for the entry into the Union of consignments of poultry, germinal products of poultry and fresh meat of poultry and game birds (Official Journal of the European Union L 69 of 4 March 2022)
Date: 2022-03-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Canada, England, United Kingdom, United States, Wales, avian influenza, fresh meat, game meat, import (EU), poultry, poultrymeat, veterinary inspection








L_2022072EN.01000901.xml










7.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 72/9







Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/364 of 3 March 2022 amending Annexes V and XIV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/404 as regards the entries for Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States in the lists of third countries authorised for the entry into the Union of consignments of poultry, germinal products of poultry and fresh meat of poultry and game birds

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 69 of 4 March 2022
)


On page 45, title, date of adoption, and on page 47, in the signature:
for:


                  ‘
                  3 March 2022
                  ’,

read:


                  ‘
                  2 March 2022
                  ’.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 4 March 2022 2022/C 108/01
Date: 2022-03-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022108EN.01000101.xml










7.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 108/1






Euro exchange rates (1)

4 March 2022
(2022/C 108/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0929 




JPY


Japanese yen


126,17 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4394 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,82388 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,7935 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0056 




ISK


Iceland króna


144,20 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,8358 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,737 




HUF


Hungarian forint


386,54 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,8530 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9495 




TRY


Turkish lira


15,5681 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4872 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3937 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,5411 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6005 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4872 




KRW


South Korean won


1 332,23 




ZAR


South African rand


16,8044 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,9065 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5584 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 725,30 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5661 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,814 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


35,776 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,5313 




MXN


Mexican peso


22,7543 




INR


Indian rupee


83,4354 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-129/22: Action brought on 7 March 2022 — Simba Toys v EUIPO — Master Gift Import (BIMBA TOYS)
Date: 2022-03-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, decorative item, gaming, logistics, packaging, registered trade mark, sports equipment, storage, toy industry, trade-mark law








C_2022171EN.01004401.xml










25.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/44






Action brought on 7 March 2022 — Simba Toys v EUIPO — Master Gift Import (BIMBA TOYS)
(Case T-129/22)
(2022/C 171/60)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Simba Toys GmbH & Co. KG (Fürth, Germany) (represented by: O. Ruhl, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Master Gift Import, SLU (Ronda, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark BIMBA TOYS — Application for registration No 17 846 486

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 December 2021 in Case R 629/2021-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-130/22: Action brought on 7 March 2022 — Biologische Heilmittel Heel v EUIPO — Esi (TRAUMGEL)
Date: 2022-03-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, dietary product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022171EN.01004402.xml










25.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/44






Action brought on 7 March 2022 — Biologische Heilmittel Heel v EUIPO — Esi (TRAUMGEL)
(Case T-130/22)
(2022/C 171/61)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Biologische Heilmittel Heel GmbH (Baden-Baden, Germany) (represented by: J. Künzel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Esi Srl (Albisola Superiore, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark TRAUMGEL — Application for registration No 16 289 712

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 December 2021 in Case R 813/2021-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the order No. 3 of the contested decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal — R 813/2021-4 of 20 December 2021;










—


alter the order No. 1 of the contested decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal -R 813/2021-4 of 20 December 2021;










—


annul the decision of the Opposition Division of 6 April 2021 beyond the goods contained in the order No. 1 insofar as the opposition was rejected for goods in Class 3;










—


order the other party to the proceedings before EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-400/20: Order of the General Court of 7 March 2022 — El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — Rudolf Böckenholt (LLOYD’S)
Date: 2022-03-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022198EN.01006501.xml










16.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 198/65






Order of the General Court of 7 March 2022 — El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — Rudolf Böckenholt (LLOYD’S)
(Case T-400/20) (1)

(2022/C 198/93)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Ninth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 262, 10.8.2020.
Case T-118/22: Action brought on 7 March 2022 — OM v Commission
Date: 2022-03-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrator, competition (EU), equal treatment, job vacancy, regulatory committee (EU), right to justice, temporary employment








C_2022191EN.01003201.xml










10.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 191/32






Action brought on 7 March 2022 — OM v Commission
(Case T-118/22)
(2022/C 191/41)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: OM (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of 29 April 2021 not to select the applicant in selection procedure COM/2020/10396 and notifying the appointment of another candidate;










—


in so far as necessary, annul the decision rejecting his complaint of 25 November 2021, registered on 26 November 2021 under number Ares(2021)7297231;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of vacancy notice COM/2020/10396 in so far as his skills and abilities were not evaluated by reference to the grid set out in that notice.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the agenda given to candidates as to the subject on which they would be questioned during the selection interview in so far as no question was put to the applicant on the main analysis he had been asked to prepare, which also entails a breach of his legitimate expectations.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging unequal treatment in so far as questions which had been devised by the selection panel to be put to candidates were not put to him and other questions which were put to him did not correspond to that predefined list. The applicant submits, in that regard, that this does not make it possible to ensure that they were also put to other candidates. The applicant further submits that his interview lasted for less time than expected, which may have put him at a disadvantage compared with the other candidates and that it cannot be ruled out that he could have achieved a better result if he had been heard on all aspects of the oral test.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the content of the evaluation grid is manifestly erroneous and insufficient with respect to the answers given by the applicant during the interview.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging lack of cooperation on the part of the Commission and breach of the duty of sound administration.
Case T-382/21: Order of the General Court of 7 March 2022 — the airscreen company v EUIPO — Moviescreens Rental (airscreen) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark airscreen — Earlier EU word mark AIRSCREEN — Article 8(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2022-03-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, building, building materials, plastics, registered trade mark, rubber industry, trade-mark law, tube








C_2022198EN.01005001.xml










16.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 198/50






Order of the General Court of 7 March 2022 — the airscreen company v EUIPO — Moviescreens Rental (airscreen)
(Case T-382/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark airscreen - Earlier EU word mark AIRSCREEN - Article 8(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
(2022/C 198/73)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: the airscreen company GmbH & Co. KG (Münster, Germany) (represented by: O. Spieker, A. Schönfleisch and N. Willich, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Moviescreens Rental GmbH (Damme, Germany) (represented by: D. Schulz and P. Stelzig, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 May 2021 (Case R 1990/2020-4), concerning opposition proceedings between the airscreen company and Moviescreens Rental.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


the airscreen company GmbH & Co. KG shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 329, 16.8.2021.