EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011TB0463
Case T-463/11: Order of the General Court of 14 December 2012 — Dectane v OHIM — Hella (DAYLINE) (Community trade mark — Opposition — Withdrawal of opposition — No need to adjudicate)
Case T-463/11: Order of the General Court of 14 December 2012 — Dectane v OHIM — Hella (DAYLINE) (Community trade mark — Opposition — Withdrawal of opposition — No need to adjudicate)
Case T-463/11: Order of the General Court of 14 December 2012 — Dectane v OHIM — Hella (DAYLINE) (Community trade mark — Opposition — Withdrawal of opposition — No need to adjudicate)
IO C 38, 9.2.2013, p. 23–24
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
9.2.2013 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 38/23 |
Order of the General Court of 14 December 2012 — Dectane v OHIM — Hella (DAYLINE)
(Case T-463/11) (1)
(Community trade mark - Opposition - Withdrawal of opposition - No need to adjudicate)
2013/C 38/41
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Dectane GmbH (Leipzig, Germany) (represented by: P. Ehrlinger and T. Hagen, lawyers)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by K. Klüpfel, then by K. Klüpfel and D. Botis, agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Hella KGaA Hueck & Co. (Lippstadt, Germany) (represented by: R. Schnekenbühl, lawyer)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 June 2011 (Case R 1231/2010-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Hella KGaA Hueck & Co. and Dectane GmbH.
Operative part of the order
1. |
There is no further need to adjudicate on the action. |
2. |
The applicant and the intervener shall bear their own costs and each shall pay one half of the costs of the defendant. |