Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62013TN0022

    Case T-22/13: Action brought on 16 January 2013 — Senz Technologies/OHIM — Impliva (Umbrellas)

    OJ C 101, 6.4.2013, 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)

    6.4.2013   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 101/19


    Action brought on 16 January 2013 — Senz Technologies/OHIM — Impliva (Umbrellas)

    (Case T-22/13)

    2013/C 101/41

    Language in which the application was lodged: English

    Parties

    Applicant: Senz Technologies BV (Delft, Netherlands) (represented by: W. Hoyng and C. Zeri, lawyers)

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

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Impliva BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands)

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    To annul the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) dated 26 September 2012 in Case R 2453/2010-3;

    Uphold the arguments put forward before the General Court and declare the registration of the Registered Community Design with no. 000579032-0001 to be valid;

    Order the Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) to bear its own costs and pay those of the applicant.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    Registered Community trade design in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: The trade design ‘Umbrellas’ — Registered Community design No 000579032-0001

    Proprietor of the Community trade design: The applicant

    Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade design: Impliva BV

    Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: The application for a declaration of invalidity was based on Articles 4 and 9 Council Regulation No 6/2002

    Decision of the Cancellation Division: Upheld the application for a declaration of invalidity

    Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

    Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1) and Articles 6 in connection with 25 (1)(b) of Council Regulation No 6/2002.


    Top