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-561/15: Action brought on 24 September 2015 — Universidad Internacional de la Rioja v OHIM — Universidad de la Rioja (UNIVERSIDAD INTERNACIONAL DE LA RIOJA UNiR)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62015TN0561

62015TN0561

September 24, 2015
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

23.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 389/63

(Case T-561/15)

(2015/C 389/71)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Universidad Internacional de la Rioja, SA (Logroño, Spain) (represented by: C. Lema Devesa and A. Porras Fernandez-Toledano, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘UNIVERSIDAD INTERNACIONAL DE LA RIOJA UNiR’ — Application for registration No 11 738 093

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 June 2015 in Case R 1914/2014-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the contested decision insofar as OHIM rejected Community trade mark application No 11 738 093 and, accordingly, allow the registration to proceed;

order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

The applicant claims that:

the contested decision fails to correctly identify the average consumers of the actual goods or services;

the contested decision fails to carry out an adequate analysis of the likelihood of confusion.

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