- 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-81/10: Judgment of the General Court of 19 May 2011 — Tempus Vade v OHIM — Palacios Serrano (AIR FORCE) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark AIR FORCE — Earlier Community and national word and figurative marks TIME FORCE — Relative grounds for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — No similarity of signs — Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010TA0081
62010TA0081
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 194/14
(Case T-81/10)(<span class="super">1</span>)
(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark AIR FORCE - Earlier Community and national word and figurative marks TIME FORCE - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity of signs - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 194/21
Language of the case: Spanish
Parties
Applicant: Tempus Vade, SL (San Sebastián de los Reyes, Spain) (represented by: A. Gómez López, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court: Juan Palacios Serrano (Alcobendas, Spain) (represented by: E. Ochoa Santamaría, J. del Valle Sánchez and V. Ruiz de Velasco Martinez de Ercilla, lawyers)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 January 2010 (Case R 1114/208-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Tempus Vade, SL and Mr. Juan Palacios Serrano.
Operative part of the judgment
1.The action is dismissed.
2.Tempus Vade, SL is ordered to pay the costs.
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 100, 17.4.2010.