# C_2014112EN.01005101.xml

| 14.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/51

---

Action brought on 4 February 2014 — LTJ Diffusion v OHIM — Arthur et Aston (ARTHUR & ASTON).

(Case T-83/14)

2014/C 112/65

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: LTJ Diffusion (Colombes, France) (represented by: S. Lederman, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Arthur et Aston SAS (Giberville, France)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 2 December 2013 in Case R 1963/2012-1 in so far as it ruled that the use of the earlier mark ‘ARTHUR’ No 17731 did not comply with the provisions of Article 15(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 2 December 2013 in Case R 1963/2012-1 in so far as it ruled that the use of the earlier mark ‘ARTHUR’ No 17731 did not comply with the provisions of Article 15(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | if the Court, following its case-law (judgment of 4 June 2013, Case T-514/11, ‘DECATHLON’), finds that it has no power to rule on the merits of the opposition filed by the company LTJ DIFFUSION on 14 April 2011 since the Board of Appeal has not yet adopted a position, it is also asked the following: to refer the case to the competent formation of the Court for a ruling to be made on the merits of the opposition filed by the company LTJ DIFFUSION on 14 April 2011 against the application for registration of the Community trade mark No 9509911, relating to the word sign ‘ARTHUR & ASTON’, to designate certain goods in Classes 3, 9, 14 and 25 and specifically ‘footwear, boots and shoes’. |
| --- | --- |

—

if the Court, following its case-law (judgment of 4 June 2013, Case T-514/11, ‘DECATHLON’), finds that it has no power to rule on the merits of the opposition filed by the company LTJ DIFFUSION on 14 April 2011 since the Board of Appeal has not yet adopted a position, it is also asked the following: to refer the case to the competent formation of the Court for a ruling to be made on the merits of the opposition filed by the company LTJ DIFFUSION on 14 April 2011 against the application for registration of the Community trade mark No 9509911, relating to the word sign ‘ARTHUR & ASTON’, to designate certain goods in Classes 3, 9, 14 and 25 and specifically ‘footwear, boots and shoes’.

footwear, boots and shoes

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Arthur et Aston SAS

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘ARTHUR & ASTON’ for goods in Classes 3, 9, 14 and 25 (Community trade mark application No 9 509 911)

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Applicant.

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: National semi-figurative trade mark containing the word element ‘Arthur’ for goods in Class 25.

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition.

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal.

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 15(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

Pleas in law:

---