- 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-204/21: Action brought on 14 April 2021 — Stryker v EUIPO (RUGGED)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TN0204
62021TN0204
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
7.6.2021
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 217/64
(Case T-204/21)
(2021/C 217/81)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Stryker Corp. (Kalamazoo, Michigan, United States) (represented by: I. Fowler, I. Junkar, and B. Worbes, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark RUGGED
Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 January 2021 in Case R 370/2020-5
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
—order EUIPO to pay the costs.
Pleas in law
—Infringement of Article 71(1) read in conjunction with Article 67 Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council and lack of competence by exceeding the limits of its power;
—Infringement of Article 7(3) Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council and incorrect statement that the evidence filed in relation to acquired distinctiveness is insufficient;
—Infringement of Article 94(1) Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council for failing to state reasons for its decision.