- 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-198/13: Action brought on 8 April 2013 — Imax/OHIM — Himax Technologies (IMAX)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013TN0198
62013TN0198
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
15.6.2013
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 171/32
(Case T-198/13)
2013/C 171/60
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Imax Corporation (Mississauga, Canada) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, lawyer, and K. Hughes, Solicitor)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Himax Technologies, Inc. (Tainan County, Taiwan)
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—Annul OHIM’s Fifth Board of Appeal’s decision of 23 January 2013 in Case R 740/2012-5; and
—Order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the defendant and, if the other party in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal intervenes, the intervener.
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘IMAX’ for goods in classes 9, 41 and 45 — Community trade mark registration No 9 392 556
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registrations No 4 411 658 and No 4 411 641 of the figurative mark ‘Himax’ for goods and services in classes 9 and 42
Decision of the Opposition Division: Partially upheld the opposition
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009.