This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62020TA0006
Case T-6/20: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Dr. Spiller v EUIPO — Rausch (Alpenrausch Dr. Spiller) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark Alpenrausch Dr. Spiller — Earlier EU word mark RAUSCH — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Case T-6/20: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Dr. Spiller v EUIPO — Rausch (Alpenrausch Dr. Spiller) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark Alpenrausch Dr. Spiller — Earlier EU word mark RAUSCH — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Case T-6/20: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Dr. Spiller v EUIPO — Rausch (Alpenrausch Dr. Spiller) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark Alpenrausch Dr. Spiller — Earlier EU word mark RAUSCH — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
OJ C 95, 28.2.2022, p. 28–28
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
OJ C 95, 28.2.2022, p. 10–10
(GA)
|
28.2.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 95/28 |
Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Dr. Spiller v EUIPO — Rausch (Alpenrausch Dr. Spiller)
(Case T-6/20) (1)
(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Alpenrausch Dr. Spiller - Earlier EU word mark RAUSCH - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2022/C 95/37)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Dr. Spiller GmbH (Siegsdorf, Germany) (represented by: J. Stock and M. Geitz, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Eberl, J. Schäfer, A. Söder and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Rausch AG Kreuzlingen (Kreuzlingen, Switzerland) (represented by: F. Stangl and S. Pilgram, lawyers)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 October 2019 (Case R 2206/2015-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Rausch Kreuzlingen and Dr. Spiller.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Dr. Spiller GmbH to pay the costs. |