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
Appeal — Article 119 of the Rules of Procedure — Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Admissibility before the Board of Appeal — Failure to file a statement setting out the grounds of appeal — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Article 59 — Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 — Rule 49(1) — Stay of proceedings — Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 — Rule 20(7)(c) — Appeal manifestly inadmissible and manifestly unfounded
Re:
Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 16 May 2011 in Case T‑145/08 Atlas Transport GmbH v OHIM, by which that court dismissed the action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 24 January 2008 (Case R 1023/2007-1) relating to invalidity proceedings between ATLAS Air Inc. and Atlas Transport GmbH — Interpretation of Article 59 of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1) and of Rule 20(7)(c) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995 implementing Regulation No 40/94 (OJ 1995 L 303, p. 1) — Circumstances justifying the stay of the cancellation proceedings — Application for annulment of the mark on which the opposition is founded pending before the national court.
1.The appeal is dismissed.
2.Atlas Transport GmbH is ordered to pay the costs.