EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-135/10: Action brought on 23 March 2010 — Pieno žvaigždės v OHIM — Fattoria Scaldasole (Iogurt.)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010TN0135

62010TN0135

March 23, 2010
With Google you find a lot.
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

22.5.2010

Official Journal of the European Union

C 134/47

(Case T-135/10)

2010/C 134/76

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: AB ‘Pieno žvaigždės’ (Vilnius, Lithuania) (represented by: I. Lukauskienė and R. Žabolienė, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fattoria Scaldasole Srl (Monguzzo, Italy)

Form of order sought

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 18 January 2010 in case R 1070/2009-2; and

Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘Iogurt.’, for goods in class 29

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Mark or sign cited: Lithuanian trade mark registration of the figurative mark ‘jogurtas’, for goods in class 29; Community trade mark registration of the figurative mark ‘jogurt’, for goods in class 29

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition in its entirety

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Deemed the appeal not to have been filed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 60 of Council Regulation No 207/2009 in conjunction with Article 8 of Commission Regulation No 2869/95 (1) as the Board of Appeal wrongly concluded that the fee for appeal was not paid within the prescribed time-limit of two months from the date of notification of the appealed decision.

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2869/95 of 13 December 1995 on the fees payable to the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OJ L 303, p. 33)

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia