EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-271/16: Judgment of the General Court of 8 November 2017 — Pempe v EUIPO — Marshall Amplification (THOMAS MARSHALL GARMENTS OF LEGENDS) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark THOMAS MARSHALL GARMENTS OF LEGENDS — Earlier EU word and figurative marks MARSHALL and Marshall AMPLIFICATION — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Admissibility of the request for proof of the earlier marks’ genuine use — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016TA0271

62016TA0271

November 8, 2017
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

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

Official Journal of the European Union

C 5/32

(Case T-271/16) (<a id="ntc1-C_2018005EN.01003201-E0001" href="#ntr1-C_2018005EN.01003201-E0001"> (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)</a>

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark THOMAS MARSHALL GARMENTS OF LEGENDS - Earlier EU word and figurative marks MARSHALL and Marshall AMPLIFICATION - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Admissibility of the request for proof of the earlier marks’ genuine use - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 005/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Yusuf Pempe (Créteil, France) (represented by: A. Vivès-Albertini, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Marshall Amplification plc (Milton Keynes, United Kingdom)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2016 (Case R 376/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Marshall Amplification and Mr Pempe.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.Dismisses the action;

2.Orders Yusuf Pempe to pay the costs.

(<a id="ntr1-C_2018005EN.01003201-E0001" href="#ntc1-C_2018005EN.01003201-E0001">(<span class="super">1</span>)</a> <a href="./../../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2016:251:TOC">OJ C 251, 11.07.2016</a>.)

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia