- 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-4/22: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2022 — Puma v EUIPO — DN Solutions (PUMA) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark PUMA — Earlier international figurative mark PUMA — Relative ground for refusal — Detriment to reputation — Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62022TA0004
62022TA0004
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
6.3.2023
Official Journal of the European Union
C 83/23
(Case T-4/22) (*)
(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark PUMA - Earlier international figurative mark PUMA - Relative ground for refusal - Detriment to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2023/C 83/28)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: P. González-Bueno Catalán de Ocón, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: DN Solutions Co. Ltd, formerly Doosan Machine Tools Co. Ltd (Seongsan-gu, Changwon-si, South Korea) (represented by: R. Böhm and C. Brecht, lawyers)
Re:
By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 28 October 2021 (Case R 1677/2020-1).
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Puma SE to pay the costs.
(*) Language of the case: English.
(1) OJ C 109, 7.3.2022.