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
(Case T-97/16)(1)
((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark GEOTEK - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Rule 40(5) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - Evidence of genuine use of the mark - Delay - Rule 61(2) and (3) and Rule 65(1) of Regulation No 2868/95 - Notification by fax of the time limit given to the proprietor - Absence of circumstances capable of challenging the transmission report submitted by EUIPO - Article 78 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Rule 57 of Regulation No 2868/95 - Request for examination of witnesses - Discretion of EUIPO))
(2017/C 195/32)
Language of the case: German
Applicant: Martin Kasztantowicz (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: R. Ronneburger, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Hanf and A. Söder, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Gbb Group Ltd (Letchworth, United Kingdom)
Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 December 2015 (Case R 3025/2014-5) concerning revocation proceedings between Gbb Group and Mr Kasztantowicz.
The Court:
1.dismisses the action;
2.orders Mr Martin Kasztantowicz to pay the costs.
OJ C 145, 25.4.2016.