I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
EN
C series
—
3.6.2024
(C/2024/3350)
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Applicant: Digi International, Inc. (Hopkins, Minnesota, United States) (represented by: M. Hawkins, T. Dolde and C. Zimmer, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Teraoka Seiko Co. Ltd (Tokyo, Japan)
Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court
Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark DIGI – International registration designating the European Union No 1 326 111
Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 January 2024 in Case R 1906/2022-1
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision to the extent that it found genuine use of the European Union trade mark registration No. 3 481 199 DIGI;
—alter the contested decision and reject the opposition No°B 2 887 449 brought against the trade mark at issue in its entirety;
—order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by EUIPO and/or the other party (assuming it intervenes in the proceedings).
—Distortion of evidence pursuant to Article 72(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Infringement of Article 47(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3350/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—