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
In Case C‑379/16 P-REC,
APPEAL under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, brought on 7 July 2016,
European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, established in Ettelbrück (Luxembourg),
European Dynamics Belgium SA, established in Brussels (Belgium),
Evropaïki Dynamiki – Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE, established in Athens (Greece),
represented by C.-N. Dede and D. Papadopoulou, dikigoroi,
appellants,
the other party to the proceedings being:
European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by N. Bambara, acting as Agent,
defendant at first instance,
composed of E. Juhász (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, K. Jürimäe and C. Lycourgos, Judges,
Advocate General: P. Mengozzi,
Registrar: A. Calot Escobar,
after hearing the Advocate General,
makes the following
1On 24 November 2016, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Ninth Chamber) made the order in European Dynamics Luxembourg and Others v EUIPO (C‑379/16 P, not published, EU:C:2016:905).
2That order contains a clerical mistake which it is appropriate for the Court to rectify of its own motion under Article 103(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court.
On those grounds, the Court (Ninth Chamber) hereby orders:
‘Luxembourg, 24 November 2016.’
Luxembourg, 12 January 2017.
Registrar
President of the Ninth Chamber
*
Language of the case: English.