Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62015TN0461

Case T-461/15: Action brought on 10 August 2015 — Guccio Gucci v OHIM — Guess? IP Holder (Representation of interlaced signs)

OJ C 328, 5.10.2015, p. 32–33 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

5.10.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 328/32

Action brought on 10 August 2015 — Guccio Gucci v OHIM — Guess? IP Holder (Representation of interlaced signs)

(Case T-461/15)

(2015/C 328/29)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Guccio Gucci SpA (Florence, Italy) (represented by: P. Roncaglia, F. Rossi and N. Parrotta, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Guess? IP Holder LP (Los Angeles, United States)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Figurative mark (Representation of interlaced signs) — Community trade mark No 5 538 012

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 May 2015 in Case R 2049/2014-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

annul the contested decision;

—

order OHIM to pay the costs incurred by the applicant during these proceedings;

—

order Guess? IP Holder L.P. to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the proceedings before both the OHIM Cancellation Division and the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law

—

Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009;

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;

—

Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Top