- 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
Case T-625/19: Action brought on 19 September 2019 — Daw v EUIPO (SOS Innenfarbe)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TN0625
62019TN0625
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
4.11.2019
Official Journal of the European Union
C 372/35
(Case T-625/19)
(2019/C 372/37)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Daw SE (Ober-Ramstadt, Germany) (represented by: A. Haberl, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
Trade mark at issue: Registration of the European Union word mark ‘SOS Innenfarbe’ — Application for registration No 17 870 690
Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 July 2019 in Case R 277/2019-4
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
—annul the Decision of EUIPO of 7 January 2019 in so far as it rejects the application for registration of the mark ‘SOS Innenfarbe’ in respect of the following goods in Class 2:
—‘Paints, lacquers, lasures, paints, preservatives against rust; Primers; Dyes, colorants, paint paste, mordants; Thickeners for colours; Fixing solutions, siccatives for colours; Thinners and binders for paints, lacquers and coatings; Solvents for thinning paints; Preservatives for wood, wood mordants and wood preservatives; Coatings, including textured; bactericides and/or fungicides; Corrosion inhibiting admixtures; Protective preparations for metals’;
—order EUIPO to allow the application for registration to be published, as lodged;
—order EUIPO to pay the costs.
Plea in law
—Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and (2) of Regulation No 2017/1001.