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 62021TN0741

    Case T-741/21: Action brought on 22 November 2021 — LG Electronics v EUIPO — ZTE Deutschland (V10)

    OJ C 37, 24.1.2022, p. 48–49 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    24.1.2022   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 37/48

    Action brought on 22 November 2021 — LG Electronics v EUIPO — ZTE Deutschland (V10)

    (Case T-741/21)

    (2022/C 37/63)

    Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Applicant: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (represented by: M. Bölling, lawyer)

    Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: ZTE Deutschland (Düsseldorf, Germany)

    Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

    Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

    Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark V10 — European Union trade mark No 14 328 892

    Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

    Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 September 2021 in Case R 2101/2020-5

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    annul the contested decision insofar as it rejects the applicant’s appeal against the cancellation decision in relation only to the goods smart phones, mobile phones and wearable smart phones;

    —

    order EUIPO to bear the costs of the proceedings.

    Pleas in law

    —

    Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council Regulation (EC) 207/2009 due to insufficient differentiation between invalidated goods;

    —

    Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council Regulation (EC) 207/2009 due to inconsistent argumentation on the public’s perception;

    —

    Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council Regulation (EC) 207/2009 by finding that there is no intrinsic and inherent characteristic;

    —

    Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council Regulation (EC) 207/2009 by finding that there is no easily recognizable characteristic;

    —

    Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council Regulation (EC) 207/2009 by finding that there is no specific, precise and objective characteristic.
    Top