- 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-642/18: Action brought on 29 October 2018 — August Wolff v EUIPO — Faes Farma (DermoFaes Atopimed)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018TN0642
62018TN0642
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
7.1.2019
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 4/36
(Case T-642/18)
(2019/C 4/48)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Dr. August Wolff GmbH & Co. KG Arzneimittel (Bielefeld, Germany) (represented by: A. Thünken, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Faes Farma, SA (Lamiaco-Leioa, Spain)
Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark DermoFaes Atopimed — Application for registration No 15 069 396
Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 July 2018 in Case R 1365/2017-2
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
—uphold the opposition and reject the contested application;
—order EUIPO and, as the case may be, the intervener to bear the costs of the proceedings and the costs incurred by proceedings before EUIPO.
Plea in law
—Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.