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
Language of the case: English
Applicant: Fidia farmaceutici SpA (Abano Terme, Italy) (represented by: R. Kunz-Hallstein and H. Kunz-Hallstein, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Stelis Biopharma ltd. (Karnataka, India)
Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative HYALOSTEL ONE mark — International registration designating the European Union No 1 399 649
Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 January 2021 in Case R 831/2020-5
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
—order EUIPO to pay the costs, in the alternative, if the other party before the Board of Appeal intervenes, order EUIPO and the intervener jointly and severally to pay the costs.
—Infringement of Article 165(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Articles 32(f) and 39(5) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625;
—Infringement of the right to be heard and the obligation to state reasons pursuant Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.