This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010TN0595
Case T-595/10: Action brought on 17 December 2010 — Zenato v OHIM — Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato e Agricoltura di Verona (RIPASSA)
Case T-595/10: Action brought on 17 December 2010 — Zenato v OHIM — Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato e Agricoltura di Verona (RIPASSA)
Case T-595/10: Action brought on 17 December 2010 — Zenato v OHIM — Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato e Agricoltura di Verona (RIPASSA)
IO C 72, 5.3.2011, p. 21–22
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
5.3.2011 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 72/21 |
Action brought on 17 December 2010 — Zenato v OHIM — Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato e Agricoltura di Verona (RIPASSA)
(Case T-595/10)
2011/C 72/36
Language in which the application was lodged: Italian
Parties
Applicant: Alberto Zenato (Verona, Italy) (represented by: A. Rizzoli, 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: Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato e Agricoltura di Verona (Verona, Italy)
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
declare the present action, together with the related annexes, admissible; |
|
— |
annul the decision of the Board of Appeal in so far as it annuls the contested decision and orders the costs of the appeal proceedings to be shared; |
|
— |
uphold, in consequence, the decision of the Opposition Division; |
|
— |
order OHIM to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: Alberto Zenato.
Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘RIPASSA’ (registration application No 106 955) for goods in Class 33.
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato e Agricoltura di Verona.
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Italian word mark ‘VINO DI RIPASSO’ (No 528 778) for goods in Class 33.
Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition rejected.
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Contested decision annulled and case remitted to the Opposition Division.
Pleas in law: Infringement and misapplication of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.