- 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-472/07: Action brought on 21 December 2007 — Enercon v OHIM — Hasbro (ENERCON)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62007TN0472
62007TN0472
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
29.3.2008
Official Journal of the European Union
C 79/28
(Case T-472/07)
(2008/C 79/55)
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Enercon GmbH (Aurich, Germany) (represented by: R. Böhm, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Hasbro Inc. (Pawtucket, United States)
Form of order sought
—That the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 25 October 2007 in Case R 959/2006-4 be annulled insofar as it dismissed the appeal of Enercon GmbH against the decision of the opposition division of 26 May 2006 ruling on opposition No B 763 666;
—that the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) is to be ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those of the applicant.
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant
Community trade mark concerned: The Community word mark ‘ENERCON’ for goods in Classes 16, 18, 24, 25, 28 and 32 — Application No 3 326 031
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Hasbro Inc.
Mark or sign cited: The Community word mark ‘TRANSFORMERS ENERGON’ for goods in classes 16, 18, 24, 25, 28, 30 and 32 — Application No 3 152 121 as well as the earlier non-registered marks ‘TRANSFORMERS ENERGON’ and ‘ENERGON’
Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in its entirety
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of the Community Trade Mark Regulation (EC) No 40/94.