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
(Case C-418/16 P) (<a id="ntc1-C_2018142EN.01000701-E0001" href="#ntr1-C_2018142EN.01000701-E0001"> (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)</a>)
((Appeal - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 15(1) - Article 57(2) and (3) - Article 64 - Article 76(2) - Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - Rule 22(2) - Rule 40(6) - Invalidity proceedings - Applications for a declaration of invalidity based on an earlier national trade mark - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Burden of proof - Rejection of the applications - Taking into account by the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of new evidence - Annulment of the decisions of the Cancellation Division of EUIPO - Referral - Consequences))
(2018/C 142/09)
Language of the case: German
Appellant: mobile.de GmbH, formerly mobile.international GmbH (represented by: T. Lührig, Rechtsanwalt)
Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: M. Fischer, acting as Agent), Rezon OOD (represented by: P. Kanchev, advokat)
The Court:
1.Dismisses the appeal;
2.Orders mobile.de GmbH to pay the costs incurred by the European Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Rezon ODD.
(<a id="ntr1-C_2018142EN.01000701-E0001" href="#ntc1-C_2018142EN.01000701-E0001">(<span class="super">1</span>)</a> <a href="./../../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2016:419:TOC">OJ C 419, 14.11.2016</a>.)