EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62013TN0645

Case T-645/13: Action brought on 29 November 2013 — Eycharis Nezi v OHIM — Etam (E)

OJ C 61, 1.3.2014, p. 9–10 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

1.3.2014   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/9


Action brought on 29 November 2013 — Eycharis Nezi v OHIM — Etam (E)

(Case T-645/13)

2014/C 61/15

Language in which the application was lodged: Greek

Parties

Applicant): Eycharis Nezi (Mykonos, Greece) (represented by: A Salkitzoglou, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Etam SAS (Clichy, France)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General 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 3 October 2013 in Case R 329/2013-4;

vary the above decision so that the applicant’s mark is registered for all the goods and service which were applied for and,

order the opponent to pay all the applicant’s legal costs, including all costs of any interveners.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant.

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘Ε’, for goods and services in Classes 14, 16, 18, 25, 26, 35 and 40 — Community trade mark application No 8701138.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The opponent before the Board of Appeal.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The Community figurative mark ‘Ε’, for goods in Classes 3, 18 and 25.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Partial annulment of the decision of the Opposition Division.

Pleas in law:

Infringement of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

Infringement of Article 4 of Regulation No 207/2009;

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation No 207/2009;

Infringement of Article 76 of Regulation No 207/2009, and

Infringement of Articles 15 and 42 of Regulation No 207/2009.


Top