- 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
Joined Cases C-488/08 P and C-489/08 P: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 4 December 2009 — Matthias Rath v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Dr. Grandel GmbH (Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Word marks Epican and Epican Forte — Opposition by the proprietor of the Community word mark EPIGRAN — Likelihood of confusion — Partial rejection of the application for registration — Appeals manifestly inadmissible)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62008CB0488
62008CB0488
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
13.3.2010
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 63/18
(Joined Cases C-488/08 P and C-489/08 P) (<span class="super">1</span>)
(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(1)(b) - Word marks Epican and Epican Forte - Opposition by the proprietor of the Community word mark EPIGRAN - Likelihood of confusion - Partial rejection of the application for registration - Appeals manifestly inadmissible)
2010/C 63/27
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Matthias Rath (represented by: S. Ziegler, C. Kleiner and F. Dehn, Rechtsanwälte)
Defendants: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, Agent), Dr. Grandel GmbH
Re:
Appeal brought against the order of the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) of 8 September 2008, Rath v OHIM and Grandel (Case T-373/06) in which the Court of First Instance dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law the action for annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 October 2006 dismissing in part the action brought against the decision of the Opposition Division which, by upholding the opposition by the proprietor of the earlier Community word mark ‘EPIGRAN’, refused to register the word mark ‘EPICAN FORTE’ for goods and services in class 5 — Likelihood of confusion between the two marks
Operative part of the order
1.The appeals are dismissed.
2.Mr Rath is ordered to pay the costs.
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 82 of 4.04.2009.