- 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 C-422/12 P: Appeal brought on 17 September 2012 by Industrias Alen SA de CV against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 10 July 2012 in Case T-135/11 Clorox v OHIM — Industrias Alen (Cloralex)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012CN0422
62012CN0422
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
8.12.2012
Official Journal of the European Union
C 379/14
(Case C-422/12 P)
2012/C 379/24
Language of the case: Spanish
Parties
Appellant: Industrias Alen SA de CV (represented by: A. Padial Martinez, abogada)
Other parties to the proceedings: The Clorox Company and the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Form of order sought
The appellant claims that the Court should:
—set aside the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 July 2012 in Case T-135/11;
—uphold the decision adopted on 16 December 2010 by the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) and, consequently, reject the opposition lodged by THE CLOROX COMPANY;
—order THE CLOROX COMPANY, the opponent, to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 (1) on the Community trade mark (‘the CTMR’).
—Error of the General Court in the comparison of the signs CLOROX and CLORALEX.
—Error of the General Court in the assessment of the likelihood of confusion.
—Current coexistence in OHIM’s register of the term CLOR in Classes 3 and 5.
—Agreements for co-existence of the marks concluded by the parties in relation to the marks CLOROX/CLORALEX in other countries.
(1) OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1.