This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62009TN0483
Case T-483/09: Action brought on 30 November 2009 — ATB Norte v OHIM — Bricocenter Italia (Affiliato BRICO CENTER)
Case T-483/09: Action brought on 30 November 2009 — ATB Norte v OHIM — Bricocenter Italia (Affiliato BRICO CENTER)
Case T-483/09: Action brought on 30 November 2009 — ATB Norte v OHIM — Bricocenter Italia (Affiliato BRICO CENTER)
IO C 24, 30.1.2010, p. 69–69
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
30.1.2010 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 24/69 |
Action brought on 30 November 2009 — ATB Norte v OHIM — Bricocenter Italia (Affiliato BRICO CENTER)
(Case T-483/09)
2010/C 24/122
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish
Parties
Applicant: ATB Norte, SL (Burgos, Spain) (represented by: P. López Ronda, G. Macías Bonilla, H.L. Curtis-Oliver and G. Marín Raigal, lawyers)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Bricocenter Italia Srl (Rozzano Milanofiori (Milan), Italy)
Form of order sought
— |
Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 September 2009 — R 1048/2008-4. |
— |
Order the defendant to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: Bricocenter S.r.l.
Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark containing the word element ‘Affiliato BRICOCENTER’ (Application No 4 939 344) in respect of services in Class 35.
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: ATB Norte, SL.
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Figurative Community trade marks containing the word elements ‘CENTROS DE BRICOLAGE BRICOCENTRO’ (No 3 262 623) and ‘ATB CENTROS DE BRICOLAGE BRICOCENTRO’ (No 989 046) in respect of services in Classes 35, 37 and 39.
Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld.
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Opposition Division’s decision annulled and the opposition rejected in its entirety.
Pleas in law: Incorrect interpretation and application of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.