Nasuprot tome, ako je neki žig bio registriran za proizvode ili usluge definirane na potpuno precizan i određen način, tako da nije moguće stvoriti posebne odjele unutar kategorije o kojoj je riječ, onda dokaz o stvarnoj uporabi žiga u odnosu na navedene proizvode i usluge nužno obuhvaća cijelu tu kategoriju u svrhu prigovora (presude od 14. srpnja 2005., Reckitt Benckiser (Španjolska)/OHIM – Aladin (ALADIN), T‐126/03, Zb., EU:T:2005:288, t. 45. i od 13. veljače 2007., Mundipharma/OHIM – Altana Pharma (RESPICUR), T‐256/04, Zb., EU:T:2007:46, t. 23.).
On the other hand, if a trade mark has been registered for goods or services defined so precisely and narrowly that it is not possible to make any significant subdivisions within the category concerned, then the proof of genuine use of the mark for those goods or services necessarily covers the entire category for the purposes of the opposition (judgments of 14 July 2005 in Reckitt Benckiser (Spain) v OHIM — Aladin (ALADIN), T‐126/03, ECR, EU:T:2005:288, paragraph 45, and 13 February 2007 in Mundipharma v OHIM — Altana Pharma (RESPICUR), T‐256/04, ECR, EU:T:2007:46, paragraph 23).EurLex-2 EurLex-2