EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-146/08: Action brought on 17 April 2008 — Deutsche Rockwool Mineralwoll v OHIM — Redrock Construction (REDROCK)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62008TN0146

62008TN0146

January 1, 2008
With Google you find a lot.
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

21.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 158/19

(Case T-146/08)

(2008/C 158/32)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Deutsche Rockwool Mineralwoll GmbH & Co. OHG (Gladbeck, Germany) (represented by: S. Beckmann, Rechstanwältin)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Redrock Construction s.r.o. (Prague, Czech Republic)

Form of order sought

Annul the defendant's decision of 18 February 2008 in Case R 506/2007-4;

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Redrock Construction s.r.o

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘REDROCK’ for goods and services in classes 1, 2, 17, 19, 36 and 37 (application No 3 866 365).

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: German word mark ‘Rock’ for goods and services in classes 1, 6-8, 17, 19, 37 and 42 (No 302 29 274); the opposition concerns registration in all classes with the exception of class 36.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition allowed and application refused in part.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Contested decision annulled and opposition rejected.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1), as there is a likelihood of confusion, or at least a likelihood of association, between the opposing marks.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia