Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
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

Document 62013TN0263

    Case T-263/13: Action brought on 8 May 2013 — Lausitzer Früchteverarbeitung v OHIM — Rivella International (holzmichel)

    IO C 207, 20.7.2013, p. 43–44 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
    IO C 207, 20.7.2013, p. 11–11 (HR)

    20.7.2013   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 207/43

    Action brought on 8 May 2013 — Lausitzer Früchteverarbeitung v OHIM — Rivella International (holzmichel)

    (Case T-263/13)

    2013/C 207/73

    Language in which the application was lodged: German

    Parties

    Applicant: Lausitzer Früchteverarbeitung GmbH (Sohland, Germany) (represented by: A. Weiß, lawyer)

    Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Rivella International AG (Rothrist, Switzerland)

    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 21 February 2013 in Case R 1968/2011-1;

    —

    vary the contested decision in such a way as to reject the opponent’s opposition;

    —

    order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the costs incurred in the course of the appeal procedure, or order the intervener to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the costs incurred in the course of the appeal procedure.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    Applicant for a Community trade mark: Lausitzer Früchteverarbeitung GmbH

    Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark containing the word element ‘holzmichel’ for goods and services in Classes 21, 24, 32, 33 and 38 — Community trade mark application No 8 904 278

    Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Rivella International AG

    Mark or sign cited in opposition: International registration of figurative marks containing the word elements ‘Michel’ and ‘Michel POWER’ for goods in Classes 29, 30, 32 and 33

    Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition rejected

    Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal upheld and registration refused

    Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009

    Top