This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62022TB0232
Case T-232/22: Order of the General Court of 8 November 2022 — Growth Finance Plus v EUIPO (catlover) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark catlover — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Case T-232/22: Order of the General Court of 8 November 2022 — Growth Finance Plus v EUIPO (catlover) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark catlover — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Case T-232/22: Order of the General Court of 8 November 2022 — Growth Finance Plus v EUIPO (catlover) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark catlover — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
OJ C 24, 23.1.2023, p. 41–41
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
23.1.2023 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 24/41 |
Order of the General Court of 8 November 2022 — Growth Finance Plus v EUIPO (catlover)
(Case T-232/22) (1)
(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark catlover - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
(2023/C 24/56)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Growth Finance Plus AG (Gommiswald, Switzerland) (represented by: H. Twelmeier, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Ringelhann and T. Klee, acting as Agents)
Re:
By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 7 February 2022 (Case R 717/2020-5).
Operative part of the order
|
1. |
The action is dismissed. |
|
2. |
Growth Finance Plus AG shall pay the costs. |