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-484/08: Action brought on 11 November 2008 — Longevity Health Products v OHIM — Merck (Kids Vits)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62008TN0484

62008TN0484

January 1, 2008
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

7.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/38

(Case T-484/08)

(2009/C 32/75)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Longevity Health Products, Inc. (Nassau, Bahamas) (represented by: J. Korab, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Merck KGaA (Darmstadt, Germany)

Form of order sought

Declare the action brought by Longevity Health Products, Inc. admissible;

annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of 28 August 2008 and dismiss the nullity proceedings of Merck KGaA against registration of Community trade mark 003 979 143; and

order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant.

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘Kids Vits’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 5 and 35 (Community trade mark No 3 979 143).

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Merck KGaA.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Word mark ‘VIDS4KIDS’ for goods in Class 5 (mark No 3 128 196).

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upholding of the opposition.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal.

Pleas in law: Breach of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1), since there is no likelihood of confusion between the opposing marks.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

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