Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

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
You are here

Document 62017TN0419

Case T-419/17: Action brought on 4 July 2017 — Mendes v EUIPO — Actial Farmaceutica (VSL
3)

OJ C 277, 21.8.2017, p. 55–56 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

Date of document:
04/07/2017
Date lodged:
04/07/2017
Author:
Cúirt Ghinearálta
Form:
Faisnéis bhreithiúnach
Authentic language:
Iodáilis
Type of procedure:
Caingean le haghaidh neamhniú
Link
Select all documents mentioning this document
Instruments cited in case law:
Link

21.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 277/55

Action brought on 4 July 2017 — Mendes v EUIPO — Actial Farmaceutica (VSL#3)

(Case T-419/17)

(2017/C 277/80)

Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Mendes SA (Lugano, Switzerland) (represented by: G. Carpineti, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Actial Farmaceutica Srl (Rome, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark ‘VSL#3’ — European Union trade mark No 1 437 789

Procedure before EUIPO: Revocation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 May 2017 in Case R 1306/2016-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

primarily, annul the contested decision of the Board of Appeal of EUIPO in accordance with and for the purposes of Article 51(1)(b) EUTMR;

—

in the alternative, annul the contested decision of the Board of Appeal of EUIPO in accordance with and for the purposes of Article 51(1)(c) EUTMR;

—

in any event, order that the applicant should be reimbursed in full for the costs of the proceedings, or at least that each party should bear its own costs in full.

Plea in law

—

Infringement of Article 51(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Top