- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-106/12: Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2013 — Cytochroma Development v OHIM — Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (ALPHAREN) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community word mark ALPHAREN — Earlier national word marks ALPHA D3 — Relative ground for refusal — Compliance by OHIM with a judgment annulling a decision of its Boards of Appeal — Article 65(6) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Composition of the Boards of Appeal — Article 1(d) of Regulation (EC) No 216/96)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012TA0106
62012TA0106
With us you find everything. Try it now!
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C 233/7
(Case T-106/12)(1)
(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark ALPHAREN - Earlier national word marks ALPHA D3 - Relative ground for refusal - Compliance by OHIM with a judgment annulling a decision of its Boards of Appeal - Article 65(6) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Composition of the Boards of Appeal - Article 1(d) of Regulation (EC) No 216/96)
2013/C 233/11
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Cytochroma Development, Inc. (Saint Michael, Barbados) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister, and A. Smith, Solicitor)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd (Jerusalem, Israel)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 2 December 2011 (Case R 1235/2011-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd and Cytochroma Development, Inc.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 2 December 2011 (Case R 1235/2011-1);
2.Orders OHIM to pay the costs.
(1)
OJ C 138, 12.5.2012.