- 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-774/14: Action brought on 17 November 2014 — Ica Foods v OHIM — San Lucio (GROK)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62014TN0774
62014TN0774
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
26.1.2015
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 26/40
(Case T-774/14)
(2015/C 026/51)
Language in which the action was brought: Italian
Parties
Applicant: Ica Foods SpA (Pomezia, Italy) (represented by: A. Nespega, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: San Lucio Srl (San Gervasio Bresciano, Italy)
Details of the proceedings before OHIM
Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Trade mark at issue: Word mark ‘GROK’ — Community mark No 4 4 39 956
Procedure before OHIM: Invalidity proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 September 2014 in Case R 1815/2013-2
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision relating to invalidity proceedings No 6374C in respect of the registration of the Community mark GROK No 4439956, for infringement of Articles 62 and 63 of the Community Trade Mark Regulation and/or for infringement of Article 8 of Regulation No 40/94 and/or failure to provide adequate reasons, for those reasons;
—order OHIM to pay the costs of the present proceedings.
Pleas in law
—infringement of Articles 62 and 63 of the Community Trade Mark Regulation for failure on the part of OHIM to notify the applicant of the deadline for submission of observations in the action, thus in breach of the adversarial principle;
—infringement of Article 8 of Regulation No 40/94 and failure to provide adequate reasons as regards the similarity between the goods deriving from San Lucio milk and the goods covered by the registration of ICA’s marks;
—infringement of the Article 8 of Regulation No 40/94 and failure to provide adequate reasons as regards the similarity between the mark GROK of San Lucio and the mark CRIK CROK of ICA;
—infringement of the Article 8 of Regulation No 40/94 and failure to provide adequate reasons in respect of the repute of the mark CRIK CROK of ICA.