EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-72/17: Action brought on 3 February 2017 — Schmid v EUIPO — Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark (Steirisches Kürbiskernöl)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62017TN0072

62017TN0072

February 3, 2017
With Google you find a lot.
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

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/59

(Case T-72/17)

(2017/C 104/83)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Gabriele Schmid (Halbenrain, Austria) (represented by: B. Kuchar, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark (Graz, Austria)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the mark at issue: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the mark ‘Steirisches Kürbiskernöl’ — International registration No 900 100

Proceedings before EUIPO: Revocation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 December 2016 in Case R 1768/2015-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

amend the contested decision and declare the mark IR No 900 100 to be revoked for the EU for all goods;

in the alternative

annul the contested decision on account of the failure to provide evidence of use of IR No 900 100 as a trade mark and refer the proceedings back to EUIPO;

in any event, order the proprietor of the mark to pay the applicant’s costs incurred in the proceedings before EUIPO and in the present proceedings.

Pleas in law

infringement of Article 15(1) of Regulation No 207/2009;

infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009;

infringement of Article 55(1) of Regulation No 207/2009.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia