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
EN
(2015/C 311/53)
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Applicants: IR (Caen, France) (represented by: C. de Marguerye, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Pirelli Tyre SpA (Milan, Italy)
Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant
Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘popchrono’ — Community trade mark No 4 177 267
Procedure before OHIM: Revocation proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 February 2015 in Case R 217/2014-5
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—receive its conclusions;
—rescind the decision of 13 February 2015 of the Board of Appeal;
—confirm the property rights of the trademark POPCHRONO;
—order OHIM to pay the costs.
—Infringement of the right to be heard;
—Narrow interpretation of ‘genuine use’ by the Board of Appeal;
—Resumption of genuine use of a community trademark in question should have been examined by OHIM according to pieces submitted by the applicant, including a prior license agreement for more than three months before the introduction of the revocation request;
—OHIM’s failure to take account of the contempt of elementary rules of competition and not considered the will of obstruction of a party against the other party.