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
2009/C 267/140
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Applicant: Emilio Pucci International BV (Baarn, The Netherlands) (represented by: M. Boletto, E. Gavuzzi, G. Lazzeretti and P. Roncaglia, lawyers)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain)
—Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 18 June 2009 in joined cases R 770/2008-2 and R 826/2008-2, in so far as it accepted registration of Community trade mark application No 3 679 594“Emidio Tucci” for all the goods and services it covers in classes 1, 2, 4-17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26-45;
—Order the defendant to pay the costs incurred by the applicant during these proceedings; and
—Order the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs incurred by the applicant during the proceedings before OHIM’s Opposition Division and Board of Appeal.
Applicant for the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark “Emidio Tucci”, for goods and services in classes 1-45
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant
Mark or sign cited: Community trade mark registration of the figurative mark “Emilio Pucci” registered for goods in classes 18 and 24; Italian trade mark registration of the word mark “EMILIO PUCCI” registered for goods classes 3, 14, 18, 21, 24, 25 and 33; Italian trade mark registration of the word mark “EMILIO PUCCI” registered for goods classes 9, 12, 18, 20, 26, 27 and 34; Italian trade mark registration of the figurative mark “Emilio Pucci” registered for goods classes 14, 18, 24 and 25
Decision of the Opposition Division: Partially accepted the opposition
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Partially upheld the appeal in cases R 826/2008-2 and R 770/2008-2; dismissed the appeal for the remainder
Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) and 8(5) of Council Regulation 207/2009 as the Board of Appeal erred in its conclusion that these legal provisions could not apply with respect to the goods and services covered by the Community trade mark concerned in classes 1, 2, 4-17, 19, 20, 21 (part of), 22, 23 and 26-45.