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
(2015/C 228/19)
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Applicant: Opko Ireland Global Holdings Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister, and A. Smith, Solicitor)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd (Jerusalem, Israel)
Applicant: Applicant
Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘ALPHAREN’ — Application for registration No 4 320 297
Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 November 2014 in Case R 2387/2014-5
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
—order OHIM to pay its own costs and those of the applicant.
—Infringement of Article 1(d)(2) of Regulation No 216/96 in that a member of the Board who took the original 2009 Board of Appeal decision was also a member of the Board that took the contested decision;
—Infringement of Article 50 of the Implementing Regulation by relying upon new evidence not before OHIM at the first hearing of the opposition;
—Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 by failing to impose the burden of proof in the opposition to prove the similarity of the goods in issue upon the opponent;
—Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 in that the Board of Appeal erred in relation to the identification of the relevant public and overall in the assessment of the likelihood of confusion.