Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62020TN0250

    Case T-250/20: Action brought on 29 April 2020 — Moviescreens Rental v EUIPO — the airscreen company (AIRSCREEN)

    OJ C 262, 10.8.2020, p. 28–29 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    10.8.2020   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 262/28

    Action brought on 29 April 2020 — Moviescreens Rental v EUIPO — the airscreen company (AIRSCREEN)

    (Case T-250/20)

    (2020/C 262/38)

    Language in which the application was lodged: German

    Parties

    Applicant: Moviescreens Rental GmbH (Damme, Germany) (represented by: D. Schulz and P. Stelzig, lawyers)

    Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: the airscreen company GmbH & Co. KG (Münster, Germany)

    Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

    Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

    Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark AIRSCREEN — EU trade mark No 3 244 662

    Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

    Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 February 2020 in Case R 2527/2018-4

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    amend the contested decision, in so far as in it, the Board of Appeal upheld the decision of the Cancellation Division, which had rejected the application for invalidity of the contested trade mark in relation to the goods at issue in the present case in

    Class 9 Inflatable motion picture screens; giant screens; silver screens

    Class 17 Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) frames fillable with air; flexible PVC surfaces

    Class 19 Transportable structures, not of metal; giant screen frames, not of metal;

    —

    order EUIPO to pay the costs.

    Pleas in law

    —

    Infringement of Article 59(1)(a) and Article 59(3), in conjunction with Article 7(1)(c), of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

    —

    Infringement of Article 59(1)(a) and Article 59(3), in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b), of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
    Top