EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62014TN0081
Case T-81/14: Action brought on 6 February 2014 — Energy Brands v OHIM — Smart Wines (SMARTWATER)
Case T-81/14: Action brought on 6 February 2014 — Energy Brands v OHIM — Smart Wines (SMARTWATER)
Case T-81/14: Action brought on 6 February 2014 — Energy Brands v OHIM — Smart Wines (SMARTWATER)
OJ C 135, 5.5.2014, p. 47–47
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
5.5.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 135/47 |
Action brought on 6 February 2014 — Energy Brands v OHIM — Smart Wines (SMARTWATER)
(Case T-81/14)
2014/C 135/60
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Energy Brands, Inc. (New York, United States) (represented by: D. Stone and R. Allos, Solicitors)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Smart Wines GmbH (Cologne, Germany)
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
— |
Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 19 November 2013 given in Case R 903/2013-2; |
— |
Order OHIM and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to bear their own costs and those of the applicant. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘SMARTWATER’ for goods in Classes 30, 32 and 33 — Community trade mark application No 8 400 194
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Earlier Community trade mark registration No 5 853 601 for the word mark ‘SMART WINES’ for goods in Classes 30 and 33
Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in its entirety
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(a)(b) and 8(5) CTMR.