Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62011TN0322

Case T-322/11: Action brought on 21 June 2011 — Morelli v OHIM — Brambilla (Partito della Libertà)

SL C 238, 13.8.2011, p. 34–34 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

13.8.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 238/34


Action brought on 21 June 2011 — Morelli v OHIM — Brambilla (Partito della Libertà)

(Case T-322/11)

2011/C 238/58

Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Raffaello Morelli (Livorno, Italy) (represented by: G.Brenelli, lawyer

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Michela Vittoria Brambilla (Milan, Italy

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the First Board of Appeal’s decision of 17 May 2011 and that of the Opposition Division of 14 May 2010;

declare that the applicant’s opposition to the application for registration of a trade mark No 6.203.012 is upheld and refuse the application for that mark;

order Ms Michela Vittoria Brambilli to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Michela Vittoria Brambilla.

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark containing the word element ‘Partito della Libertà’ (application for registration No 5.6203.012), for goods and services in classes 9, 14, 16, 24, 25, 35, 36, 38, 41, 42 and 45.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Raffaello Morelli

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Domain name ‘partitodellaliberta.it’, assigned by the Autorità proposta all’assegnazione dei domini ‘it’ to Raffaello Morelli on 9 August 2004, which the opponents claimed was used in the course of trade for goods and services in classes 16, 35, 38, 41 and 45

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition rejected.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed.

Pleas in law: Misapplication of Article 8(4) of Regulation No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark, incorrect appraisal of ‘use in the course of trade’ with reference to a name used in the sphere of politics and incorrect appraisal of the documents proving business use of the earlier sign.


Top