EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021TA0706
Case T-706/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Balaban v EUIPO (Stahlwerkstatt) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark Stahlwerkstatt — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Case T-706/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Balaban v EUIPO (Stahlwerkstatt) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark Stahlwerkstatt — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Case T-706/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Balaban v EUIPO (Stahlwerkstatt) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark Stahlwerkstatt — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
OJ C 432, 14.11.2022, p. 29–29
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
14.11.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 432/29 |
Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Balaban v EUIPO (Stahlwerkstatt)
(Case T-706/21) (1)
(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark Stahlwerkstatt - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 432/35)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Okan Balaban (Bornheim, Germany) (represented by: T. Schaaf, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Nicolás Gómez and M. Eberl, acting as Agents)
Re:
By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment in part and the variation of the examiner’s decision of 27 August 2020 and of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 September 2021 (Case R 1987/2020-1).
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Mr Okan Balaban to pay the costs. |