- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-568/11: Action brought on 26 October 2011 — Kokomarina v OHIM — Euro Shoe Unie (interdit de me gronder I D M G)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011TN0568
62011TN0568
With us you find everything. Try it now!
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
14.1.2012
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 13/19
(Case T-568/11)
2012/C 13/39
Language in which the application was lodged: French
Parties
Applicant: Kokomarina (Concarneau, France) (represented by: C. Charrière-Bournazel, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Euro Shoe Unie NV (Beringen, Belgium)
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the General Court should:
—declare Kokomarina’s action to be admissible;
—annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 21 July 2011 in Case R 1814/2010-1;
—dismiss the opposition brought by EURO SHOE UNIE NV against the application for registration as a Community trade mark of Kokomarina’s mark ‘I D M G — interdit de me gronder’.
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant.
Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark containing the verbal element ‘interdit de me gronder I D M G’ for goods in class 25.
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Euro Shoe Unie NV.
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Benelux word mark ‘DMG’ for goods in Classes 18, 25 and 35.
Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld.
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed.
Pleas in law: Lack of use of the opposed mark and no likelihood of confusion.