- 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-62/14: Action brought on 27 January 2014 — BR IP Holder v OHIM — Greyleg Investments (HOKEY POKEY)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62014TN0062
62014TN0062
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
12.5.2014
Official Journal of the European Union
C 142/35
(Case T-62/14)
2014/C 142/46
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: BR IP Holder LLC (Canton, United States) (represented by: F. Traub, lawyer, and C. Rohsler, Solicitor)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Greyleg Investments Ltd (Baltonsborough, United Kingdom)
Form of order sought
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) of 22 November 2013 given in Case R 1091/2012-4;
—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 ‘HOKEY POKEY’ for ‘confectionery’ in Class 30 — Community trade mark application No 9 275 678
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Earlier, non-registered trade mark ‘HOKEY POKEY’ claimed to be in use in the United Kingdom for ‘confectionery, namely ice cream’
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 Article 8(4) CTMR.