- 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-218/10: Action brought on 12 May 2010 — DHL International v OHIM — Service Point Solutions (SERVICEPOINT)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010TN0218
62010TN0218
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
17.7.2010
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 195/26
(Case T-218/10)
2010/C 195/41
Language in which the application was lodged: German
Parties
Applicant: DHL International GmbH (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: K.-U. Jonas, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Service Point Solutions, SA (Barcelona, Spain)
Form of order sought
—Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 25 February 2010 in Case R 62/2009-2;
—Order the defendant and, if appropriate, the other party to the proceedings to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant.
Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark including the word element ‘SERVICEPOINT’ for goods and services in Classes 16, 20, 35 and 39.
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Service Point Solutions, SA
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Figurative mark including the word element ‘Service Point’ for goods and services in Classes 8, 9, 16, 20, 35, 38, 39 and 42; figurative mark including the word element ‘service point’ for goods and services in Class 16; and figurative mark including the word element ‘service point’ for goods and services in Classes 9 and 42.
Decision of the Opposition Division: The opposition was upheld.
Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was dismissed.
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, since there is no likelihood of confusion between the opposing marks, and infringement of Article 76(1) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 since the Board of Appeal failed to have regard to various documents.
Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).