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
(2020/C 262/38)
Language in which the application was lodged: German
Applicant: Moviescreens Rental GmbH (Damme, Germany) (represented by: D. Schulz and P. Stelzig, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: the airscreen company GmbH & Co. KG (Münster, Germany)
Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark AIRSCREEN — EU trade mark No 3 244 662
Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 February 2020 in Case R 2527/2018-4
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—amend the contested decision, in so far as in it, the Board of Appeal upheld the decision of the Cancellation Division, which had rejected the application for invalidity of the contested trade mark in relation to the goods at issue in
Class 9 Inflatable motion picture screens; giant screens; silver screens
Class 17 Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) frames fillable with air; flexible PVC surfaces
Class 19 Transportable structures, not of metal; giant screen frames, not of metal;
—order EUIPO to pay the costs.
—Infringement of Article 59(1)(a) and Article 59(3), in conjunction with Article 7(1)(c), of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Infringement of Article 59(1)(a) and Article 59(3), in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b), of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.