This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2005/106/56
Case T-9/05: Action brought on 12 January 2005 by Hoya Corporation against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Case T-9/05: Action brought on 12 January 2005 by Hoya Corporation against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Case T-9/05: Action brought on 12 January 2005 by Hoya Corporation against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
OJ C 106, 30.4.2005, p. 24–25
(ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
30.4.2005 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 106/24 |
Action brought on 12 January 2005 by Hoya Corporation against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(Case T-9/05)
(2005/C 106/56)
Language in which the application was lodged: English
An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 12 January 2005 by Hoya Corporation, established in Tokyo, (Japan) represented by A. Nordemann, lawyer.
Indo Internacional S.A.established in Barcelona (Spain) was also a party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
annul the Decision of the First Board of Appeal of the OHIM of 3 November 2004 in case R 433/2004-1; |
|
— |
order the defendant to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
|
Applicant for Community trade mark: |
The applicant |
|
Community trade mark sought: |
Word mark ‘AMPLITUDE’ for products in class 9 (eyeglasses etc.), Community trade mark application No. 1 723 931 |
|
Proprietor of mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: |
Indo Internacional S.A. |
|
Mark or sign cited in opposition: |
National figurative mark ‘AMPLY’ for products in class 9 (eyeglasses etc.) |
|
Decision of the Opposition Division: |
Opposition rejected |
|
Decision of the Board of Appeal: |
Annuls contested decision; registration refused |
|
Pleas in law: |
Violation of Article 8 paragraph 1(b) of Regulation 40/94 (1) |
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 11, p. 1)