- 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-4/18: Action brought on 9 January 2018 — Holzer y Cia v EUIPO — Annco (AT ANN TAYLOR)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018TN0004
62018TN0004
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
26.2.2018
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 72/44
(Case T-4/18)
(2018/C 072/56)
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Holzer y Cia, SA de CV (Mexico city, Mexico) (represented by: N. Fernández Fernández-Pacheco, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Annco, Inc. (New York, New York, United States)
Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant
Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark containing the word elements ‘AT ANN TAYLOR’ — EU trade mark No 11 197 647
Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity
Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 November 2017 in Case R 2371/2016-2
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—admit the action;
—annul the contested decision;
—confirm the validity of the registration of the EUTM No 11 197 647 ‘AT ANN TAYLOR’ for all the products for which the said application sought protection;
—order the intervener to pay the costs of the procedure.
Plea in law
—The Board of Appeal erred in his analysis regarding: the existence of confusing similarity between the conflicting signs and the knowledge of the proprietor of a confusingly similar trademark when filing its application; the intentions of the proprietor at the time of filing its trademark; the probative value given to the evidences submitted by the cancellation applicant and the burden of proof.