This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011TN0636
Case T-636/11: Action brought on 5 December 2011 — Hostel Drap v OHIM — Aznar textil (MY drap)
Case T-636/11: Action brought on 5 December 2011 — Hostel Drap v OHIM — Aznar textil (MY drap)
Case T-636/11: Action brought on 5 December 2011 — Hostel Drap v OHIM — Aznar textil (MY drap)
IO C 65, 3.3.2012, pp. 13–14
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 05/12/2011
- Date lodged:
- 05/12/2011
- Author:
- Cúirt Ghinearálta
- Form:
- Faisnéis bhreithiúnach
- Authentic language:
- Spáinnis
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Instruments cited in case law:
- Link
- EUROVOC descriptor:
|
3.3.2012 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 65/13 |
Action brought on 5 December 2011 — Hostel Drap v OHIM — Aznar textil (MY drap)
(Case T-636/11)
2012/C 65/26
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish
Parties
Applicant: Hostel Drap, SL (Monistrol de Montserrat, Spain) (represented by: C. Prat, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Aznar textil, SL (Paterna, Spain)
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 26 September 2011 in Case R 2127/2010-2; |
|
— |
reject the opposition; |
|
— |
refer the case back to the OHIM for it to register the mark applied for in all the classes in respect of which registration is sought; |
|
— |
order OHIM to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘MY drap’ for goods in Classes 16, 21 and 24
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Aznar textil, SL
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Figurative mark ‘BON DRAP’ for goods in Classes 23, 24 and 26, which is well known in the Community
Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, since the conflicting marks are not similar and there is no likelihood of confusion.
