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-120/17) (*)
(EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark fluo. - Partial rejection of the application for registration - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2018/C 427/66)
Language of the case: English
Applicant: M & T Emporia Ilektrikon-Ilektronikon Eidon AE (Thessaloniki, Greece) (represented by: A. Spyridonos, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M.d.M. Baldares and J. Ivanauskas, Agents)
Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 December 2016 (Case R 863/2016-2), relating to the application for registration of the figurative sign fluo. as a European Union trade mark.
The Court:
1.Annuls paragraph 2 of the operative part of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 December 2016 (Case R 863/2016-2);
2.Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by M & T Emporia Ilektrikon-Ilektronikon Eidon AE, including the expenses necessarily incurred for the purpose of the appeal proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.
(*)
OJ C 121, 18.4.2017.
* * *