- 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-227/16: Judgment of the General Court of 21 June 2018 — Haverkamp IP v EUIPO — Sissel (Foot mat) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Registered Community design representing a foot mat — Earlier design — Grounds for invalidity — No individual character — Informed user — Degree of freedom of the designer — Proof of saturation of the state of the art — No different overall impression — Article 5 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — Article 63(1) of Regulation No 6/2002)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016TA0227
62016TA0227
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
(Case T-227/16) (*1)
‘(Community design — Invalidity proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Registered Community design representing a foot mat — Earlier design — Grounds for invalidity — No individual character — Informed user — Degree of freedom of the designer — Proof of saturation of the state of the art — No different overall impression — Article 5 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — Article 63(1) of Regulation No 6/2002)’
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Haverkamp IP GmbH (Kindberg, Austria), authorised to replace Reinhard Haverkamp (represented by: A. Waldenberger, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Hanne and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Sissel GmbH (Bad Dürkheim, Germany)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 February 2016 (Case R 2618/2014-3) concerning invalidity proceedings between Sissel and Mr Haverkamp
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Haverkamp IP GmbH to pay the costs.
*
(1) OJ C 243, 4.7.2016