Valitse kokeelliset ominaisuudet, joita haluat kokeilla

Tämä asiakirja on ote EUR-Lex-verkkosivustolta

Asiakirja 62016TN0030

    Case T-30/16: Action brought on 26 January 2016 — M.I. Industries v OHIM — Natural Instinct (Natural Instinct Dog and Cat food as nature intended)

    OJ C 106, 21.3.2016, s. 40—41 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    21.3.2016   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 106/40


    Action brought on 26 January 2016 — M.I. Industries v OHIM — Natural Instinct (Natural Instinct Dog and Cat food as nature intended)

    (Case T-30/16)

    (2016/C 106/47)

    Language in which the application was lodged: English

    Parties

    Applicant: M.I. Industries, Inc. (Lincoln, United States) (represented by: T. Elias, Barrister, B. Cookson, Solicitor)

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

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Natural Instinct Ltd (Camberley, United Kingdom)

    Details of the proceedings before OHIM

    Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

    Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘Natural Instinct Dog and Cat food as nature intended’ — Application for registration No 11 438 074

    Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

    Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 November 2015 in Case R 2944/2014-5

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    annul the contested decision;

    the applicant’s opposition No B 002 181 272 be upheld and NIL’s application No 11 438 074 be refused; alternatively, declare that the applicant has proved use its CTMs No 5 208 418 and No 5 208 201 for the purposes of the opposition No B 002 181 272, and remit the matter to the Fifth Board of Appeal for a determination of the issues arising in respect of each of those marks under Article 8(1)(b) CTMR; in the further alternative, remit the matter back to the Fifth Board of Appeal in its entirety;

    order the defendant to pay to the applicant the applicant’s costs of and occasioned by this appeal.

    Pleas in law

    Infringement of Article 42(2) Regulation No 207/2009;

    Infringement of Rule 22(3) and (4) of Regulation No 2868/95;

    Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) Regulation No 207/2009;

    Infringement of Article 75 Regulation No 207/2009.


    Alkuun