EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-495/11: Action brought on 19 September 2011 — Streng v OHIM — Gismondi (PARAMETRICA)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011TN0495

62011TN0495

September 19, 2011
With Google you find a lot.
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

26.11.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 347/37

(Case T-495/11)

2011/C 347/67

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Michael Streng (Erding, Germany) (represented by: A. Pappert, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fulvio Gismondi (Roma, Italy)

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 19 July 2011 in case R 1348/2010-4, and refer the case back to the Fourth Board of Appeal; and

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘PARAMETRICA’, for services in classes 36 and 42 — Community trade mark application No 6048433

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: German trade mark registration No 30311096 of the word mark ‘parameta’, for services in classes 35, 38, 41 and 42

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in its entirety

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the decision of the Opposition Division and rejected the opposition

Pleas in law: Infringement of Rules 19(2) and (3) in connection with Rule 98(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95, as the Board of Appeal wrongly considered that the submitted documents containing WIPO INID codes are not in the language of the proceedings and/or taken together with the translation provided in the writ of 3 November 2008, do not constitute ‘translation’ within the meaning of Rule 98(1) CTMIR.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia