I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
(Case T-145/14)(1)
((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community position mark consisting of two parallel stripes on a shoe - Community and national figurative marks and earlier international registration representing three parallel stripes applied to shoes and clothing - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 221/16)
Language of the case: English
Applicant: adidas AG (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented initially by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers, and subsequently by I. Fowler, Solicitor)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock and N. Bambara, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Shoe Branding Europe BVBA (Oudenaarde, Belgium) (represented by J. Løje, lawyer)
Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 November 2013 (Case R 1208/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between adidas AG and Shoe Branding Europe BVBA.
The Court:
1.Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 28 November 2013 (Case R 1208/2012-2);
2.Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by adidas AG;
3.Orders Shoe Branding Europe BVBA to bear its own costs.
OJ C 129, 28.4.2014.