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 62013TN0600

    Case T-600/13: Action brought on 15 November 2013 — Bimbo v OHIM (FIBRA PROTEÍNAS NUTRIENTES)

    OJ C 31, 1.2.2014, p. 13–13 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    1.2.2014   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 31/13

    Action brought on 15 November 2013 — Bimbo v OHIM (FIBRA PROTEÍNAS NUTRIENTES)

    (Case T-600/13)

    2014/C 31/23

    Language of the case: Spanish

    Parties

    Applicant: Bimbo, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: J. Carbonell Callicó, lawyer)

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

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the General Court should:

    —

    annul the decision of the Board of Appeal of 11 September 2013 and, consequently, grant Community figurative mark No 11 094 381 for all of the goods in respect of which it is requested in Class 30;

    —

    order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings, in accordance with Article 87(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘FIBRA PROTEÍNAS NUTRIENTES’ for goods in Class 30 — Community trade mark application No 11 094 381

    Decision of the Examiner: Application for registration rejected

    Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

    Pleas in law:

    —

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

    —

    Infringement of Article 83 of Regulation No 207/2009 with regard to the principle of equal treatment and Articles 6 and 14 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
    Top