![]() ![]() Having regard to the response of the intervener lodged at the Court Registry on 7 January 2020,įurther to the hearing on 9 October 2020,ġ On 30 April 2010, the applicant, Hasbro, Inc., filed an application for registration of an EU trade mark with the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the European Union trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1), as amended (replaced by Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the European Union trade mark (OJ 2017 L 154, p. 1)).Ģ Registration as a mark was sought for the word sign MONOPOLY.ģ The goods and services in respect of which registration was sought are, following the restriction made in the course of the proceedings before EUIPO, in Classes 9, 16, 28 and 41 of the Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended, and correspond, for each of those classes, to the following description: ![]() Having regard to the response of EUIPO lodged at the Court Registry on 8 January 2020, Having regard to the application lodged at the Court Registry on 30 September 2019, Registrar: A. Juhász-Tóth, Administrator, THE GENERAL COURT (Sixth Chamber, Extended Composition),Ĭomposed of A. Marcoulli, President, S. Frimodt Nielsen, J. Schwarcz (Rapporteur), C. Iliopoulos and R. Norkus, Judges, Kreativni Događaji d.o.o., established in Zagreb (Croatia), represented by R. Kunze, lawyer,ĪCTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 July 2019 (Case R 1849/2017‑2), relating to invalidity proceedings between Kreativni Događaji and Hasbro, The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court, being ![]() Hasbro, Inc., established in Pawtucket, Rhode Island (United States), represented by J. Moss, Barrister,Įuropean Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by P. Sipos and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents, (EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU word mark MONOPOLY – Absolute ground for refusal – Bad faith – Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)) ![]() JUDGMENT OF THE GENERAL COURT (Sixth Chamber, Extended Composition) ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |