- 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-246/20: Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — Aerospinning Master Franchising v EUIPO — Mad Dogg Athletics (SPINNING) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU word mark SPINNING — Trade mark which has become the common name in the trade for a product or service in respect of which it is registered — Article 51(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Relevant public)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020TA0246
62020TA0246
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 340/30
(Case T-246/20) (*)
(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark SPINNING - Trade mark which has become the common name in the trade for a product or service in respect of which it is registered - Article 51(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Relevant public)
(2022/C 340/39)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Aerospinning Master Franchising s. r. o. (Prague, Czech Republic) (represented by: K. Labalestra, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Mad Dogg Athletics, Inc. (Venice, California, United States) (represented by: J. Steinberg, lawyer)
Re:
By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 26 February 2020 (Case R 369/2019-4), relating to revocation proceedings between itself and the intervener.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action.
2.Orders Aerospinning Master Franchising s. r. o. to pay the costs.
(*)
Language of the case: English.
OJ C 215, 29.6.2020.
* * *