This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62017CN0685
Case C-685/17 P: Appeal brought on 6 December 2017 by Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, Wise Dialog Bank SpA (Banca Widiba SpA) against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 26 September 2017 in Case T-84/16: Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA and Banca Widiba SpA v EUIPO
Case C-685/17 P: Appeal brought on 6 December 2017 by Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, Wise Dialog Bank SpA (Banca Widiba SpA) against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 26 September 2017 in Case T-84/16: Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA and Banca Widiba SpA v EUIPO
Case C-685/17 P: Appeal brought on 6 December 2017 by Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, Wise Dialog Bank SpA (Banca Widiba SpA) against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 26 September 2017 in Case T-84/16: Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA and Banca Widiba SpA v EUIPO
IO C 231, 2.7.2018, p. 7–7
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
Case C-685/17 P: Appeal brought on 6 December 2017 by Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, Wise Dialog Bank SpA (Banca Widiba SpA) against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 26 September 2017 in Case T-84/16: Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA and Banca Widiba SpA v EUIPO
Appeal brought on 6 December 2017 by Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, Wise Dialog Bank SpA (Banca Widiba SpA) against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 26 September 2017 in Case T-84/16: Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA and Banca Widiba SpA v EUIPO
(Case C-685/17 P)
2018/C 231/07Language of the case: EnglishParties
Appellants: Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, Wise Dialog Bank SpA (Banca Widiba SpA) (represented by: L. Trevisan, D. Contini, avvocati)
Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 17 May 2018 the Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) held that the appeal was inadmissible.