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
EN
2014/C 351/27
Language in which the application was lodged: Italian
Applicant: Giand Srl (Rimini, Italy) (represented by: F. Caricato, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Flamagas, SA (Barcelona, Spain)
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 11 June 2014 in Case R 2117/2011-4, finding that there is no likelihood of confusion between the marks referred to below;
—Refer the case back to OHIM so it can amend the decision on the substance of the case and register Community Trade Mark No 8 6 80 746 in respect of all the goods covered, without prejudice to those which are uncontested;
—Order OHIM to pay the costs of proceedings before the Opposition Division, Board of Appeal and General Court.
Applicant for a Community trade mark: Giand Srl
Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘FLAMINAIRE’ for goods in Classes 16 and 34 — Community Trade Mark application No 8 6 80 746
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Flamagas, SA
Mark or sign cited in opposition: national and international word marks for goods in Classes 16 and 34
Decision of the Opposition Division: opposition rejected in part
Decision of the Board of Appeal: appeal dismissed
Pleas in law:
—Breach of the principle of ne bis in idem;
—Incorrect assessment of the likelihood of confusion;
—Incorrect assessment of the evidence.