Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
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

Document 62017TN0302

    Case T-302/17: Action brought on 18 May 2017 — Sata v EUIPO — Zhejiang Rongpeng Air Tools (6000)

    OJ C 231, 17.7.2017, p. 45–46 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Date of document:
    18/05/2017
    Date lodged:
    18/05/2017
    Author:
    General Court
    Form:
    Judicial information
    Authentic language:
    German
    Type of procedure:
    Action for annulment
    Link
    Select all documents mentioning this document
    Instruments cited in case law:
    Link

    17.7.2017   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 231/45

    Action brought on 18 May 2017 — Sata v EUIPO — Zhejiang Rongpeng Air Tools (6000)

    (Case T-302/17)

    (2017/C 231/57)

    Language in which the application was lodged: German

    Parties

    Applicant: Sata GmbH & Co. KG (Kornwestheim, Germany) (represented by: M.-C. Simon, lawyer)

    Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Zhejiang Rongpeng Air Tools Co. Ltd (Pengjie Town, China)

    Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

    Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

    Trade mark at issue: The sign ‘6000’ — EU trade mark No 13 112 545

    Procedure before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings

    Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 March 2017 in Case R 656/2016-4

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    annul the contested decision;

    —

    order EUIPO to pay the costs;

    —

    in the event that the respondent before the Board of Appeal decides to intervene in the proceedings, order that intervener to pay the costs.

    Pleas in law

    —

    Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009;

    —

    Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009;

    —

    Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;

    —

    Infringement of the principle of equal treatment and the principle of sound administration.
    Top