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
(2015/C 328/13)
Language in which the application was lodged: Polish
Applicant: PP Gappol Marzena Porczyńska (Łódź, Poland) (represented by: J. Gwiazdowska, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: GAP (ITM), Inc. (San Francisco, United States of America)
Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant
Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘GAPPoL’ — Application No 8 346 165
Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 May 2015 in Case R 686/2013-1
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—set aside the contested decision;
—give a final decision by amending the decision of the Board of Appeal by rejecting the opposition also in regard to the goods in Classes 20 and 25;
—order OHIM to pay the costs of the proceedings.
—Infringement of Articles 59 and 64(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) (‘Regulation No 207/2009’);
—Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 and of Rule 50(2)(h) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1995 L 303, p. 1) (‘Regulation No 2868/95’);
—Infringement of Article 76 of Regulation No 207/2009 and of Rule 50(2)(g) of Regulation No 2868/95;
—Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;
—Infringement of Articles 8(5) and 9(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009.