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 T-65/20) (*)
(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark KNEISSL - Partial revocation - No genuine use of the mark - Extent of use - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Rule 22(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 10(3) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625) - Abuse of rights)
(2021/C 357/34)
Language of the case: German
Applicant: Kneissl Holding GmbH (Ebbs, Austria) (represented by: O. Nilgen and A. Kockläuner, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Fischer, D. Hanf and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: LS 9 GmbH (Munich, Germany)
Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 November 2019 (Case R 2265/2018-2), relating to revocation proceedings between LS 9 and Kneissl Holding.
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Kneissl Holding GmbH to pay the costs.
(*)
Language of the case: German.
OJ C 103, 30.3.2020.