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 62015TN0628

Case T-628/15: Action brought on 11 November 2015 — Frame v OHIM — Bianca-Moden (BiancalunA)

OJ C 7, 11.1.2016, p. 33–34 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

11.1.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/33

Action brought on 11 November 2015 — Frame v OHIM — Bianca-Moden (BiancalunA)

(Case T-628/15)

(2016/C 007/45)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Frame Srl (San Giuseppe Vesuviano, Italy) (represented by: M. Borghese, R. Giordano, E. Montelione, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Bianca-Moden GmbH & Co. KG (Ochtrup, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘BiancalunA’ — Application for registration No 11 246 204

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 August 2015 in Case R 2720/2014-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

annul the contested decision; and/or

—

remit the case to OHIM so that the likelihood of confusion is properly analyzed taking into account the results of the proof of use filed by Bianca-Moden GmbH & Co. KG;

—

order OHIM to pay the costs both at the first instance and on the present proceedings;

—

in the alternative, reform the contested decision so that the following goods in class 25 would be registered: underwear, pyjama’s, t-shirts, panties, undues.

Pleas in law

—

Erroneous interpretation of Regulation No 207/2009 in selecting just one earlier right;

—

Erroneous interpretation of Regulation No 207/2009 in evaluating the likelihood of confusion amongst the signs in comparison.
Top