Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62010TN0135

    Case T-135/10: Action brought on 23 March 2010 — Pieno žvaigždės v OHIM — Fattoria Scaldasole (Iogurt.)

    SL C 134, 22.5.2010, p. 47–47 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    22.5.2010   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 134/47


    Action brought on 23 March 2010 — Pieno žvaigždės v OHIM — Fattoria Scaldasole (Iogurt.)

    (Case T-135/10)

    2010/C 134/76

    Language in which the application was lodged: English

    Parties

    Applicant: AB ‘Pieno žvaigždės’ (Vilnius, Lithuania) (represented by: I. Lukauskienė and R. Žabolienė, lawyers)

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

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fattoria Scaldasole Srl (Monguzzo, Italy)

    Form of order sought

    Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 18 January 2010 in case R 1070/2009-2; and

    Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    Applicant for the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

    Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘Iogurt.’, for goods in class 29

    Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

    Mark or sign cited: Lithuanian trade mark registration of the figurative mark ‘jogurtas’, for goods in class 29; Community trade mark registration of the figurative mark ‘jogurt’, for goods in class 29

    Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition in its entirety

    Decision of the Board of Appeal: Deemed the appeal not to have been filed

    Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 60 of Council Regulation No 207/2009 in conjunction with Article 8 of Commission Regulation No 2869/95 (1) as the Board of Appeal wrongly concluded that the fee for appeal was not paid within the prescribed time-limit of two months from the date of notification of the appealed decision.


    (1)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2869/95 of 13 December 1995 on the fees payable to the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OJ L 303, p. 33)


    Top