- 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-618/13: Action brought on 25 November 2013 — Oracle America v OHIM — Aava Mobile (AAVA CORE)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013TN0618
62013TN0618
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
15.2.2014
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 45/36
(Case T-618/13)
2014/C 45/63
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Oracle America, Inc. (Wilmington, United States) (represented by: T. Heydn, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Aava Mobile Oy (Oulu, Finland)
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 11 September 2013 given in Case R 1369/2012-2;
—Order the defendant to pay the costs of proceedings.
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘AAVA CORE’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 38 and 42 — Community trade mark application No 9 712 811
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 6 551 626 of the word mark ‘JAVA’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 16, 35, 37, 38, 41, 42 and 45; well-known trade mark ‘JAVA’ in all Member States of the European Union for goods and services in Classes 9, 38 and 42
Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition in its entirety
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) and 8(5) CTMR.