ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Case T-302/17: Judgment of the General Court of 29 May 2018 — Sata v EUIPO — Zhejiang Rongpeng Air Tools (6000) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark 6000 — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 52(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Equal treatment — Principle of sound administration — Obligation to state reasons)

Judgment of the General Court of 29 May 2018 — Sata v EUIPO — Zhejiang Rongpeng Air Tools (6000)

(Case T-302/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark 6000 — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 52(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Equal treatment — Principle of sound administration — Obligation to state reasons)’

Parties

Applicant: Sata GmbH & Co. KG (Kornwestheim, Germany) (represented by: M.-C. Simon, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Hanf, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Zhejiang Rongpeng Air Tools Co. Ltd (Pengjie Town, China) (represented by: S. Fröhlich and M. Hartmann, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 March 2017 (Case R 656/2016-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Zhejiang Rongpeng Air Tools and Sata.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sata GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 231, 17.7.2017.
Case T-67/17: Judgment of the General Court of 18 May 2018 — Italytrade v EUIPO — Tpresso (tèespresso) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark tèespresso — Earlier international figurative mark TPresso and earlier international word mark TPRESSO — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 18 May 2018 — Italytrade v EUIPO — Tpresso (tèespresso)

(Case T-67/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark tèespresso — Earlier international figurative mark TPresso and earlier international word mark TPRESSO — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Italytrade Srl (Bari, Italy) (represented by: N. Clemente, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the Court: Tpresso SA (Zürich, Switzerland) (represented by: L. Biglia and R. Spagnolli, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 November 2016 (Case R 959/2016-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Tpresso and Italytrade.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Italytrade Srl to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 104, 3.4.2017.
Case T-218/17: Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2018 — HF v Parliament (Civil Service — Contractual staff — Article 24 of the Staff Regulations — Request for assistance — Article 12a of the Staff Regulations — Psychological harassment — Advisory Committee dealing with harassment complaints — Decision rejecting the request for assistance — Right to be heard — Audi alteram partem rule — Refusal to disclose the opinion of the Advisory Committee and the minutes of the hearing of witnesses — Length of the administrative procedure — Reasonable time)

Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2018 — HF v Parliament

(Case T-218/17) ( 1 )

‛(Civil Service — Contractual staff — Article 24 of the Staff Regulations — Request for assistance — Article 12a of the Staff Regulations — Psychological harassment — Advisory Committee dealing with harassment complaints — Decision rejecting the request for assistance — Right to be heard — Audi alteram partem rule — Refusal to disclose the opinion of the Advisory Committee and the minutes of the hearing of witnesses — Length of the administrative procedure — Reasonable time)’

Parties

Applicant: HF (represented by: A. Tymen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Taneva and M. Ecker, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 270 TFEU seeking, firstly, the annulment of the decision of the Parliament of 3 June 2016 by which that institution’s authority empowered to conclude contracts of employment rejected the applicant’s request for assistance made on 11 December 2014 and, secondly, compensation for the loss which she allegedly suffered as a result of the illegalities in the handling of that request for assistance by the authority.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the European Parliament to pay its own costs and to bear a quarter of the costs incurred by HF;

3. Order HF to bear three-quarters of her own costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 178, 6.6.2017.
Case T-310/17: Judgment of the General Court of 14 June 2018 — Lion’s Head Global Partners v EUIPO — Lion Capital (LION’S HEAD global partners) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark LION’S HEAD global partners — Earlier EU word mark LION CAPITAL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 14 June 2018 — Lion’s Head Global Partners v EUIPO — Lion Capital (LION’S HEAD global partners)

(Case T-310/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark LION’S HEAD global partners — Earlier EU word mark LION CAPITAL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Lion’s Head Global Partners LLP (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: R. Nöske, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Lion Capital LLP (London) (represented by D. Rose and J. Warner, Solicitors)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 February 2017 (Case R 1477/2016 4), relating to opposition proceedings between Lion Capital and Lion’s Head Global Partners.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Lion’s Head Global Partners LLP to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 231, 17.7.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 September 2018 — Eddy’s Snack Company v EUIPO — Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli (Eddy’s Snackcompany)

(Case T-652/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Eddy’s Snackcompany - Earlier national word mark TEDDY - Relative ground for refusal - Principle of ne ultra petita - Article 76(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) No 2017/1001) - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2018/C 392/35)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Eddy’s Snack Company GmbH (Lügde, Germany) (represented by: M. Decker, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Fischer, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli AG (Kilchberg, Switzerland)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 July 2017 (Case R 1999/2016-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli and Eddy’s Snack Company.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 11 July 2017 (Case R 1999/2016-4);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Eddy’s Snack Company GmbH in the proceedings before the General Court.

(1) OJ C 382, 13.11.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2018 — Quadri di Cardano v Commission

(Case T-273/17) (1)

((Civil service - Members of the contract staff — Expatriation allowance - Article 4(1)(b) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations - Ten-year reference period - Nationality of the State of employment - Residence in the State of employment - Duties in an international organisation - Temporary employment contract))

(2018/C 341/25)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Alessandro Quadri di Cardano (Alicante, Spain) (represented by: N. de Montigny and J.-N. Louis, then N. de Montigny, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Bohr and M. Mensi initially, then T. Bohr and L. Radu Bouyon, Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU and seeking annulment of the decision dated 19 July 2016 of the Commission’s Office for the Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO), in so far as it refuses to grant the applicant the expatriation allowance on his entry into the service of INEA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Alessandro Quadri di Cardano to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 221, 10.7.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 27 September 2018 — Ntolas v EUIPO — General Nutrition Investment (GN Laboratories)

(Case T-712/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark GN Laboratories - Earlier EU word mark GNC - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2018/C 427/82)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Christos Ntolas (Wuppertal, Germany) (represented by: C. Renger, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: P. Sipos and by D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: General Nutrition Investment Co. (Wilmington, Delaware, Arizona, United States of America)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 July 2017 (Case R 2358/2016-5), relating to opposition proceedings between General Nutrition Investment Co. and C. Ntolas.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Christos Ntolas to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 437, 18.12.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 25 September 2018 — Novartis v EUIPO — Chiesi Farmaceutici (AKANTO)

(Case T-182/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark AKANTO - Earlier EU word mark KANTOS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2018/C 408/64)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Novartis AG (Basel, Switzerland) (represented by: L. Junquera Lara, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented initially by: P. Duarte Guimarães and J. Ivanauskas, and subsequently by J. Ivanauskas and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Chiesi Farmaceutici SpA (Parma, Italy) (represented by: T. de Haan, P. Péters, and F. Folmer, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 January 2017 (Case R 531/2016-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Chiesi Farmaceutici and Novartis.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Novartis AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 161, 22.5.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2018 — L-Shop-Team v EUIPO (bags2GO)

(Case T-561/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU figurative mark bags2GO - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) No 2017/1001))

(2018/C 427/76)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: L-Shop-Team GmbH (Dortmund, Germany) (represented by: A. Sautter, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: V. Mensing and A. Söder, Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 June 2017 (Case R 1650/2016-5), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign bags2GO as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders L-Shop-Team GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 27 September 2018 — Sevenfriday v EUIPO — Seven (SEVENFRIDAY)

(Case T-448/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark SEVENFRIDAY - Earlier EU word mark SEVEN - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2018/C 427/73)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sevenfriday AG (Zurich, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Mostardini, F. Mellucci, S. Pallavicini and G. Bellomo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Seven SpA (Leinì, Italy) (represented by: L. Trevisan, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 May 2017 (Case R 2291/2016-2), concerning opposition proceedings between Seven and Sevenfriday.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sevenfriday AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 300, 11.9.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 18 October 2018 — FCA US v EUIPO — Busbridge (VIPER)

(Case T-109/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark VIPER - Earlier national word mark VIPER - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Goods for which the earlier mark has been used - Extent of use of the earlier mark - Article 57(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 436/58)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: FCA US LLC (City of Auburn Hills, Michigan, United States) (represented by: C. Morcom, QC)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Hanf, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Robert Dennis Busbridge (Hookwood, United Kingdom)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 December 2016 (Case R 554/2016-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between R.D. Busbridge and FCA US.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders FCA US LLC to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 121, 18.4.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2018 — DNV GL v EUIPO (Sustainablel)

(Case T-644/17) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Application for European Union word mark Sustainablel - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2001)))

(2018/C 436/67)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: DNV GL AS (Høvik, Norway) (represented by: J. Albers and N. Köster, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Lukošiūtė, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 July 2017 (Case R 2/2017-2), relating to an application for registration of the word mark Sustainablel as a European Union trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders DNV GL AS to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 374, 6.11.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 November 2018 — Haufe-Lexware v EUIPO — Le Shi Holdings (Beijing) (Leshare)

(Case T-546/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Leshare - Earlier international word mark LEXWARE - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Similarity of the signs))

(2019/C 25/50)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Haufe-Lexware GmbH & Co. Kg (Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany) (represented by: N. Hebeis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Fischer and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Le Shi Holdings (Beijing) Ltd (Beijing, China)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 June 2017 (Case R 1691/2016-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Haufe-Lexware and Le Shi Holdings (Beijing).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Haufe-Lexware GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 338, 9.10.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2018 — DI v EASO

(Case T-129/17 RENV)

(Civil service - EASO staff - Members of the contract staff - Fixed-term contract - Probationary period - Decision to dismiss at the end of the probationary period - Rule of correspondence between the application and the complaint - Liability)

(2019/C 4/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: DI (represented by: I. Vlaic and G. Iliescu, lawyers)

Defendant: European Asylum Support Office (represented by: W. Stevens, acting as Agent, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for, first, annulment of the decision of the Executive Director of EASO of 28 February 2013 to dismiss the applicant at the end of his probationary period and, second, damages for the damage allegedly suffered by him and his family.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 November 2018 — Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi v EUIPO — Papouis Dairies (Papouis Halloumi)

(Case T-702/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Papouis Halloumi - Earlier EU collective word mark HALLOUMI - Relative ground for refusal - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2019/C 44/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi (Nicosia, Cyprus) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC and V. Marsland, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Papouis Dairies Ltd (Nicosia) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 August 2017 (Case R 2782/2014-4) concerning opposition proceedings between the Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi and Papouis Dairies.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 3 August 2017 (Case R 2782/2014-4) concerning opposition proceedings between the Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi and Papouis Dairies Ltd;

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi;

3. Orders Papouis Dairies to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 424, 11.12.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 29 November 2018 — Louis Vuitton Malletier v EUIPO — Fulia Trading (LV BET ZAKŁADY BUKMACHERSKIE)

(Case T-373/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark LV BET ZAKŁADY BUKMACHERSKIE - Earlier EU figurative mark LV - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001) - Earlier decisions of EUIPO recognising the reputation of the earlier trade mark))

(2019/C 44/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Louis Vuitton Malletier (Paris, France) (represented by: P. Roncaglia, G. Lazzeretti, F. Rossi and N. Parrotta, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Fulia Trading Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: L. Karpierz, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 March 2017 (Case R 1567/2016-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Louis Vuitton Malletier and Fulia Trading.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 29 March 2017 (Case R 1567/2016-4);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay one half of the costs incurred by Louis Vuitton Malletier;

3. Orders Fulia Trading Ltd to bear its own costs and to pay one half of the costs incurred by Louis Vuitton Malletier.

(1) OJ C 256, 7.8.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 December 2018 — Fifth Avenue Entertainment v EUIPO — Commodore Entertainment (THE COMMODORES)

(Case T-459/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark ‘THE COMMODORES’ - Unregistered earlier sign ‘Commodores’ - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Relative ground for refusal - Reference to the national law governing the earlier mark - Action for passing off))

(2019/C 72/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Fifth Avenue Entertainment LLC (Orlando, Florida, United States) (represented by: B. Brandreth, Barrister, and D. Cañadas Arcas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill and S. Bonne, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Commodore Entertainment Corp. (Saint Paul, Minnesota, United States) (represented by: J. Mellor QC and J. Whelan, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 May 2017 (Case R 851/2016-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Commodore Entertainment and Fifth Avenue Entertainment.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 22 May 2017 (Case R 851/2016-5);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Fifth Avenue Entertainment LLC;

3. Orders Commodore Entertainment Corp. to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 309, 18.9.2017.