- 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-6/20: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Dr. Spiller v EUIPO — Rausch (Alpenrausch Dr. Spiller) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark Alpenrausch Dr. Spiller — Earlier EU word mark RAUSCH — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020TA0006
62020TA0006
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
28.2.2022
Official Journal of the European Union
C 95/28
(Case T-6/20) (*)
(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Alpenrausch Dr. Spiller - Earlier EU word mark RAUSCH - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2022/C 95/37)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Dr. Spiller GmbH (Siegsdorf, Germany) (represented by: J. Stock and M. Geitz, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Eberl, J. Schäfer, A. Söder and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Rausch AG Kreuzlingen (Kreuzlingen, Switzerland) (represented by: F. Stangl and S. Pilgram, lawyers)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 October 2019 (Case R 2206/2015-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Rausch Kreuzlingen and Dr. Spiller.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Dr. Spiller GmbH to pay the costs.
(*)
Language of the case: German.