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
(2017/C 231/57)
Language in which the application was lodged: German
Applicant: Sata GmbH & Co. KG (Kornwestheim, Germany) (represented by: M.-C. Simon, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Zhejiang Rongpeng Air Tools Co. Ltd (Pengjie Town, China)
Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant
Trade mark at issue: The sign ‘6000’ — EU trade mark No 13 112 545
Procedure before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 March 2017 in Case R 656/2016-4
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
—order EUIPO to pay the costs;
—in the event that the respondent before the Board of Appeal decides to intervene in the proceedings, order that intervener to pay the costs.
—Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009;
—Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009;
—Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;
—Infringement of the principle of equal treatment and the principle of sound administration.