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
C series
—
(C/2025/2699)
Language in which the application was lodged: Polish
Applicant: Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol sp. z. o. o. (Częstochowa, Poland) (represented by: A. Dobosz, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Beata Oraczewska (Rzeszów, Poland)
Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant
Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark ‘100’ – EU trade mark No 3 875 408
Proceedings before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 January 2025 in Case R 1052/2024-1
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision of EUIPO of 27 January 2025 in its entirety and rule that the application for a declaration of invalidity of trade mark EUTM 003875408 ‘100’ should be rejected in its entirety;
—order the defendant to pay the applicant’s costs of the proceedings before the General Court of the European Union and – on the basis of Article 190(2) of the Rules of Procedure – the costs necessarily incurred by the applicant for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO;
—in the event that the intervener joins the proceedings, rule that she must cover her own costs for the purposes of those proceedings.
—Infringement of Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Infringement of Article 59(1) in conjunction with Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2699/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—