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
(2022/C 95/58)
Language in which the application was lodged: Italian
Applicant: Piaggio & C. SpA (Pontedera, Italy) (represented by: F. Jacobacci and B. La Tella, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Zhejiang Zhongneng Industry Co. Ltd (Taizhou, China)
Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court
Trade mark at issue: European Union three-dimensional mark (Shape of a scooter) –European Union trade mark No 11 686 482
Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 October 2021 in Case R 359/2021-5
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
in the alternative:
—annul the contested decision and refer the case back to the Boards of Appeal for them to set out clearly in which countries the EU mark No 11 686 482 of the applicant is valid and/or has acquired distinctive character and, conversely, in which countries it has not acquired such distinctive character, on the basis of the evidence provided by the proprietor;
in any event:
—order the defendant to pay the procedural costs relating to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal, pursuant to Article 190 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court of the European Union;
—order EUIPO and the potential intervener to pay the entirety of the costs of the present proceedings.
—Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009;
—Infringement and/or incorrect interpretation of Article 7(3) of Council Regulation No 207/2009 and incorrect assessment of the evidence provided by the proprietor of the EU mark.