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-287/17) (1)
((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark SWEMAC - Earlier national company name or trade name SWEMAC Medical Appliances AB - Relative ground for refusal - Limitation in consequence of acquiescence - Article 53(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 60(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Likelihood of confusion - Article 54(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 61(2) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Article 8(4) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Evidence presented for the first time before the General Court))
(2019/C 103/34)
Language of the case: English
Applicant: Swemac Innovation AB (Linköping, Sweden) (represented by: G. Nygren, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: SWEMAC Medical Appliances AB (Täby, Sweden) (represented by: P. Jonsell, lawyer)
Application brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 February 2017 (Case R 3000/2014-5) relating to invalidity proceedings between Swemac Innovation and SWEMAC Medical Appliances.
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Swemac Innovation AB to pay the costs, including those necessarily incurred by SWEMAC Medical Appliances AB for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).
OJ C 213, 3.7.2017.