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 62014TN0336

    Case T-336/14: Action brought on 15 May 2014 — Société des produits Nestlé/OHIM (NOURISHING PERSONAL HEALTH)

    OJ C 261, 11.8.2014, p. 27–27 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    11.8.2014   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 261/27

    Action brought on 15 May 2014 — Société des produits Nestlé/OHIM (NOURISHING PERSONAL HEALTH)

    (Case T-336/14)

    2014/C 261/50

    Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Applicant: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Jaeger-Lenz, A. Lambrecht and S. Cobet-Nüse, lawyers)

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

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 12 March 2014 in case R 149/2013-4;

    —

    Order the OHIM to pay the costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    Community trade mark concerned: International registration of the word mark ‘NOURISHING PERSONAL HEALTH’ for goods and services in Classes 5, 10, 41, 42 and 44 — Community trade mark application no 01 102 735

    Decision of the Examiner: The application was rejected

    Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was rejected

    Pleas in law:

    —

    Infringement of Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009;

    —

    Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009;

    —

    Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
    Top