Arnold Reuss

Firm overview:

Düsseldorf boutique intellectual property firm Arnold Reuss advises clients in trademarks, technical protective rights, competition, and copyright. The firm facilitates international proceedings by coordinating with partners in different jurisdictions through the firm’s litigation practice.

Says a peer: “Arnold Reuss in Düsseldorf is a very good firm. They are nice people, high quality, and put a lot of work in their cases. We were on the other side on occasions, for significant clients, and saw them operating on a high level.”

Team overview:

Arnold Reuss is a 20 lawyer firm with five partners and 11 associates. Name partners Prof. Dr Peter Reuss and Dr Bernhold Arnold split IP disciplines with Reuss focusing on trademark, design and competition law, as well as copyright law and Arnold focusing on patent and copyright law.

Key matters:

• In a landmark decision on platform liability in design law #Amazon was found liable for infringements of community designs offered by third parties on its marketplace. ARNOLD RUESS helped client Sigor achieve this decision at the Regional Court of Düsseldorf. A luminaire manufacturer, Hashtag #Sigor is distributing the #Nuindie lamp via retailers, which – due to its popularity – is often the subject of counterfeit sales, as in this case.
• This preliminary injunction, subject to appeal, broke new ground, holding that the Court of Justice of the European Union’s (CJEU) Louboutin (trademark) case law must also be applied in European design law.
• Arnold Reuss represented Luxembourg-based electric fleet commercial vehicles operator B-ON 2 S.à.r.l. in response to a European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) Opposition Division motion brought by beON Consult GmbH, owner of the mark beON, in opposition to the EUTM mark B-ON for classes 9 (computer hardware) and 42 (design of computer software and hardware).
• The Opposition Division partially ruled in favour of beON Consult GmbH stating “a likelihood of confusion where there is a risk that the public might believe that the goods or services covered by the trade marks in question come from the same undertaking or, as the case may be, from economically-linked undertakings”.
• The Opposition Division refused European Union trade mark application No 18 674 505 in respect of all the contested goods and services. B-ON 2 S.à.r.l. Was allowed to proceed with the application for the remaining goods and services. B-ON 2 S.à.r.l. bore the costs of the opposition, fixed at EUR 620.

Clients:

Adenauer Markengesellschaft UG, B-ON 2, Cansativa, Hochwerk Immobilien, Kraftling, MITOcare, Rimôn Falkenfort Geier Krampe Rechtsanwälte und Steuerberater PartG, Serendipity, Sigor, SIGOR Licht, tonies, Zentis North America Holding, ZENTIS GmbH & Co. KG