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
—
(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark DAOgest - Earlier EU word mark DAOSIN - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(C/2025/66)
Language of the case: English
Applicant: Stada Arzneimittel AG (Bad Vilbel, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate, R. Kaase and K. Rachlitz, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Stoyanova-Valchanova and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Bioiberica, SAU (Palafolls, Spain) (represented by: E. Sugrañes Coca, lawyer)
By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 25 April 2023 (Case R 1384/2022-2).
The Court:
1.Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 25 April 2023 (Case R 1384/2022-2);
2.Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Stada Arzneimittel AG;
3.Orders Bioiberica, SAU to bear its own costs.
—
Language of the case: English.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/66/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—
* * *