This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62012TN0050
Case T-50/12: Action brought on 7 February 2012 — AMC-Representações Têxteis v OHIM — MIP Metro (METRO KIDS COMPANY)
Case T-50/12: Action brought on 7 February 2012 — AMC-Representações Têxteis v OHIM — MIP Metro (METRO KIDS COMPANY)
Case T-50/12: Action brought on 7 February 2012 — AMC-Representações Têxteis v OHIM — MIP Metro (METRO KIDS COMPANY)
SL C 109, 14.4.2012, p. 21–21
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
14.4.2012 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 109/21 |
Action brought on 7 February 2012 — AMC-Representações Têxteis v OHIM — MIP Metro (METRO KIDS COMPANY)
(Case T-50/12)
2012/C 109/45
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: AMC-Representações Têxteis Lda (Taveiro, Portugal) (represented by: V. Caires Soares, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany)
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 24 November 2011 in case R 2314/2010-1; |
|
— |
Order the Defendant and, as appropriate, the Intervener in the proceedings to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘METRO KIDS COMPANY’, for goods and services in classes 24, 25 and 39 — Community trade mark application No 8200909
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Mark or sign cited in opposition: International trade mark registration No 852751 of the figurative mark ‘METRO’, for goods and services in classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44 and 45
Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal erred in finding that the confronted marks were similar and the likelihood of confusion and/or association could not be excluded.