This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62008TN0145
Case T-145/08: Action brought on 17 April 2008 — Atlas Transport v OHIM — Atlas Air (ATLAS)
Case T-145/08: Action brought on 17 April 2008 — Atlas Transport v OHIM — Atlas Air (ATLAS)
Case T-145/08: Action brought on 17 April 2008 — Atlas Transport v OHIM — Atlas Air (ATLAS)
OJ C 158, 21.6.2008, p. 19–19
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
21.6.2008 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 158/19 |
Action brought on 17 April 2008 — Atlas Transport v OHIM — Atlas Air (ATLAS)
(Case T-145/08)
(2008/C 158/31)
Language in which the application was lodged: German
Parties
Applicant: Atlas Transport GmbH (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: U. Hildebrandt, K. Schmidt-Hern and B. Weichhaus, Rechstanwälte)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Atlas Air, Inc. (New York, United States of America)
Form of order sought
|
— |
Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 24 January 2008 (Case R 1023/2007-1); |
|
— |
order the defendant to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Word mark ‘ATLAS’ for goods and services in classes 9, 36 and 39 (Community trade mark No 2 970 788).
Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicant.
Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: Atlas Air, Inc.
Trade mark right of applicant for the declaration: In particular the figurative mark ‘ATLASAiR’ registered in the Benelux States for goods in class 39 (No 555 184).
Decision of the Cancellation Division: Community trade mark declared partially invalid for services in class 39.
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Applicant's appeal dismissed as inadmissible.
Pleas in law: Infringement of the third sentence of Article 59 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1), as the grounds of the appeal were linked to very specific assumptions and implicit grounds were not regarded as being sufficient. Further, analogous infringement of Article 61 of Regulation No 40/94 in conjunction with Rule 20(7) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (2), as the proceedings before OHIM should necessarily have been suspended.
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1995 L 303, p. 1).