- 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-116/21: Judgment of the General Court of 2 February 2022 — Maternus v EUIPO — adp Gauselmann (WILD) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark WILD — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 52(1)(a) and Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(a) and Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TA0116
62021TA0116
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 128/22
(Case T-116/21)
(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark WILD - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 52(1)(a) and Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(a) and Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2022/C 128/32)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Maternus GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: M. Zoebisch and R. Drozdz, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: R. Manea and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: adp Gauselmann GmbH (Espelkamp, Germany) (represented by: K. Mandel, lawyer)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 December 2020 (Case R 932/2019-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between adp Gauselmann and Maternus.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Maternus GmbH to pay the costs.
(1) OJ C 148, 26.4.2021.