- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-588/19: Judgment of the General Court of 24 March 2021 — Novomatic v EUIPO — adp Gauselmann (Power Stars) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU figurative mark Power Stars — Partial revocation declaration — Partial lack of genuine use — Proof of genuine use — Article 51(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75(1), first sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94(1), first sentence, of Regulation 2017/1001) — Right to be heard — Article 75(1), second sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94(1), second sentence, of Regulation 2017/1001)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TA0588
62019TA0588
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 217/40
(Case T-588/19) (*)
(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark Power Stars - Partial revocation declaration - Partial lack of genuine use - Proof of genuine use - Article 51(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75(1), first sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94(1), first sentence, of Regulation 2017/1001) - Right to be heard - Article 75(1), second sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94(1), second sentence, of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2021/C 217/51)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Novomatic AG (Gumpoldskirchen, Austria) (represented by: M. Ringer, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka and S. Hanne, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the Court: adp Gauselmann GmbH (Espelkamp, Germany) (represented by: K. Mandel, lawyer)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 June 2019 (Case R 2038/2018-2), relating to revocation proceedings between adp Gauselmann and Novomatic.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Novomatic AG to pay the costs.
(*)
Language of the case: German.
ECLI:EU:C:2021:140