- 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-222/10: Action brought on 12 May 2010 — ratiopharm v OHIM — nycomed (ZUFAL)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010TN0222
62010TN0222
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
17.7.2010
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 195/27
(Case T-222/10)
2010/C 195/42
Language in which the application was lodged: German
Parties
Applicant: ratiopharm GmbH (Ulm, Germany) (represented by: S. Völker, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: nycomed GmbH (Konstanz, Germany)
Form of order sought
—Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 12 March 2010 in Case R 874/2008-4;
—Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to pay the costs of the proceedings.
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant.
Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘ZUFAL’ for goods in Class 5.
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: nycomed GmbH
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community word mark ‘ZURCAL’ for goods in Class 5 and three national word marks ‘ZURCAL’ for goods in Class 5.
Decision of the Opposition Division: The opposition was upheld.
Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was dismissed.
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, since there is no likelihood of confusion between the opposing marks.
Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).