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-219/22: Action brought on 22 April 2022 — Wallmax v EUIPO — Roxtec (Representation of a blue square containing eight concentric black circles)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62022TN0219

62022TN0219

April 22, 2022
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 237/65

(Case T-219/22)

(2022/C 237/84)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Wallmax Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: F. Ferrari, L. Goglia and G. Rapaccini, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Roxtec AB (Karlskrona, Sweden)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

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

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark (Representation of a blue square containing eight concentric black circles) — European Union trade mark No 7 376 023

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 February 2022 in Case R 1093/2021-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

partially annul the contested decision, in the part in which the Second Board of Appeal holds that the contested trademark is not invalid pursuant to Article 7(e)(ii) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council for the following goods: Class 6 — Cable and pipe penetration seals, made from metal; sealing frames made from metal; Class 17 — Sealing frames, made from plastic or rubber; Class 19 — Non-metallic rigid pipes for building; non-metallic sealing frames;

partially annul the contested decision, in the part in which the Second Board of Appeal annulled the Cancellation Division’s decision in relation to the decision on costs;

as a consequence of the above, uphold EUIPO’s Cancellation Division decision rendered on 23 April 2021;

order EUIPO to pay the costs of the present proceedings.

Plea in law

Infringement of Article 7(1)(e)(ii) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

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