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
2013/C 274/30
Language in which the application was lodged: Polish
Applicant: Harper Hygienics S.A. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: R. Rumpel, legal adviser)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Clinique Laboratories LLC (New York, United States of America)
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 29 April 2013 (Case R 606/2012-5) in so far as it refuses registration of ‘CLEANIC intimate’ as a Community trade mark for all goods in Classes 3 and 16 and for certain goods in Class 5;
—amend the contested decision by registering the trade mark for all goods and services applied for;
—order OHIM to pay the costs of the proceedings.
Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant
Community trade mark concerned: figurative trade mark containing the word elements ‘CLEANIC intimate’ for goods in Classes 3, 5 and 16 — Application No 009 217 531 for a Community trade mark
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Clinique Laboratories LLC
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade marks No 54 429 for goods in Classes 3, 14, 25 and 42 and No 2 294 429 for goods in Classes 35 and 42
Decision of the Opposition Division: opposition upheld in part
Decision of the Board of Appeal: appeal dismissed
Pleas in law: Breach of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (1) as regards establishment of the similarity of the trade marks and of the likelihood of confusion on the part of consumers, and breach of Article 8(5) of that regulation
Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).