This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010TN0233
Case T-233/10: Action brought on 20 May 2010 — Nike International Ltd v OHIM — Intermar Simanto Nahmias (JUMPMAN)
Case T-233/10: Action brought on 20 May 2010 — Nike International Ltd v OHIM — Intermar Simanto Nahmias (JUMPMAN)
Case T-233/10: Action brought on 20 May 2010 — Nike International Ltd v OHIM — Intermar Simanto Nahmias (JUMPMAN)
IO C 195, 17.7.2010, p. 30–30
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
17.7.2010 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 195/30 |
Action brought on 20 May 2010 — Nike International Ltd v OHIM — Intermar Simanto Nahmias (JUMPMAN)
(Case T-233/10)
2010/C 195/47
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Nike International Ltd (Beaverton, USA) (represented by: M. De Justo Bailey, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Intermar Simanto Nahmias (Individual Company) (Istanbul, Turkey)
Form of order sought
— |
Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 11 March 2010 in case R 738/2009-1, as far as the opposition decision No B 1326299 has been upheld for all the contested goods; |
— |
Order the defendant to bear the costs of the proceedings; and |
— |
Order the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs of the proceedings, should it become an intervening party in this case. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant
Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘JUMPMAN’, for goods in class 25
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Mark or sign cited: Spanish trade mark registration No 2657489 of the word mark ‘JUMP’, for goods in class 25; Community trade mark registration No 2752145 of the word mark ‘JUMP’, for goods in class 25
Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition for all of the contested goods and rejected the application in its entirety
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal wrongly assessed that there was a likelihood of confusion between the concerned trade marks.