This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010TN0498
Case T-498/10: Action brought on 18 October 2010 — Mayer Naman v OHIM — Daniel & Mayer (David Mayer)
Case T-498/10: Action brought on 18 October 2010 — Mayer Naman v OHIM — Daniel & Mayer (David Mayer)
Case T-498/10: Action brought on 18 October 2010 — Mayer Naman v OHIM — Daniel & Mayer (David Mayer)
IO C 346, 18.12.2010, p. 51–52
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
18.12.2010 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 346/51 |
Action brought on 18 October 2010 — Mayer Naman v OHIM — Daniel & Mayer (David Mayer)
(Case T-498/10)
()
2010/C 346/101
Language in which the application was lodged: Italian
Parties
Applicant: David Mayer Naman (Rome, Italy) (represented by: S. Sutti, lawyer, S. Cazzaniga, lawyer, and V. Fedele, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Daniel & Mayer Srl (Milan, Italy)
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
— |
vary the contested decision in its entirety; |
— |
order the defendant to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Figurative mark containing the word element ‘David Mayer’ (registration application No 1518950), to designate inter alia goods in Classes 18 and 25
Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicant
Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: Daniel & Mayer Srl
Trade mark right of applicant for the declaration: Italian word mark ‘DANIEL & MAYER MADE IN ITALY’ (No 472351), to designate goods in Class 25, and the unregistered word mark ‘DANIEL & MAYER’, used in Italy in relation to the ‘manufacture and sale of garments and accessories’
Decision of the Cancellation Division: Application for a declaration of invalidity upheld in part
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed
Pleas in law: Infringement and misapplication of Article 8 of Regulation No 207/2009