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 62021TN0530

    Case T-530/21: Action brought on 30 August 2021 — Pierre Lannier v EUIPO — Pierre Lang Trading (PL)

    OJ C 422, 18.10.2021, p. 29–30 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    18.10.2021   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 422/29

    Action brought on 30 August 2021 — Pierre Lannier v EUIPO — Pierre Lang Trading (PL)

    (Case T-530/21)

    (2021/C 422/38)

    Language in which the application was lodged: French

    Parties

    Applicant: Pierre Lannier (Ernolsheim-lès-Saverne, France) (represented by: N. Boespflug, lawyer)

    Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Pierre Lang Trading GmbH (Vienna, Austria)

    Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

    Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

    Trade mark at issue: Application for EU figurative mark PL — Application for registration No 16 176 992

    Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

    Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 June 2021 in Case R 1915/2020-5

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    declare the appeal brought against the opposition decision to be inadmissible because the statement of grounds was not submitted within the time limit;

    —

    annul the contested decision is so far as it states that the mark applied for is similar to the earlier mark;

    —

    order EUIPO to pay the costs;

    —

    order the company Pierre Lang GmbH to pay the costs occasioned by its intervention, should it intervene.

    Pleas in law

    —

    Infringement of Article 22(1) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625, and of Article 67 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

    —

    Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
    Top