- 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-312/15: Action brought on 9 June 2015 — Market Watch v OHIM — Glaxo Group (MITOCHRON)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62015TN0312
62015TN0312
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
(Case T-312/15)
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Market Watch Franchise & Consulting, Inc. (Freeport, Bahamas) (represented by: J. Korab, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Glaxo Group Ltd (Brentford, United Kingdom)
Details of the proceedings before OHIM
Applicant: Applicant
Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘MITOCHRON’ — Application for registration No 11 200 078
Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 March 2015 in Case R 507/2014-2
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—admit the complaint;
—annul the contested decision and dismiss in its entirety the application filed by the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal;
—order OHIM to pay the costs.
Plea in law
The trade marks involved in the dispute are not so similar as to be capable of being confused.