This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011TN0473
Case T-473/11: Action brought on 30 August 2011 — Longevity Health Products v OHIM — Weleda Trademark (MENOCHRON)
Case T-473/11: Action brought on 30 August 2011 — Longevity Health Products v OHIM — Weleda Trademark (MENOCHRON)
Case T-473/11: Action brought on 30 August 2011 — Longevity Health Products v OHIM — Weleda Trademark (MENOCHRON)
OJ C 311, 22.10.2011, p. 45–45
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
22.10.2011 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 311/45 |
Action brought on 30 August 2011 — Longevity Health Products v OHIM — Weleda Trademark (MENOCHRON)
(Case T-473/11)
2011/C 311/84
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Longevity Health Products, Inc. (Nassau, Bahamas) (represented by: J. Korab, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Weleda Trademark AG (Arlesheim, Switzerland)
Form of order sought
|
— |
declare the action by the company Longevity Health Products Inc. admissible; |
|
— |
annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 6 July 2011 in Case R 2345/2010-4 and reject the opposition by Weleda Trademark AG to the trade mark registration CTM 005050752; and |
|
— |
order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to bear the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: Longevity Health Products, Inc.
Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘MENOCHRON’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 5 and 35.
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Weleda Trademark AG
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Word mark ‘MENODORON’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 5 and 44.
Decision of the Opposition Division: The opposition was upheld.
Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was dismissed.
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8 of Regulation No 207/2009, (1) because there is no likelihood that the marks at issue would be confused.
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).