ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 215/15

Action brought on 22 May 2013 — Nutrexpa v OHIM — Kraft Foods Italia Intellectual Property (Cuétara MARÍA ORO)

(Case T-271/13)

2013/C 215/20

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Nutrexpa, SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: J. Grau Mora, M. Ferrándiz Avendaño and Y. Sastre Canet, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Kraft Foods Italia Intellectual Property Srl (Milan, Italy)

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 (Trade Marks and Designs) of 18 March 2013 in Case R 1285/2012-1, whereby it rejected the application for registration of Community figurative trade mark No 9 056 045‘Cuétara MARÍA ORO’ for ‘Preserved and dried fruits; preserved, dried and cooked vegetables’ (Class 29) and ‘Flour and preparations made from cereals, bread, pastry and confectionery, ices; biscuits’ (Class 30), which should consequently be registered by OHIM;

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark containing the word elements ‘Cuétara MARÍA ORO’ for goods in Classes 5, 29 and 30 — Application for registration of Community trade mark No 9 056 045

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Kraft Foods Italia Intellectual Property Srl

Mark or sign cited in opposition: National and Community figurative marks containing the word element ‘ORO’ for goods in Classes 29 and 30

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld in part

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Pleas in law: Breach of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009
—

The applicant maintains that the Commission did not inform it of the facts that could be alleged against it, and did not give it the opportunity to be heard before the adoption of the penalty.
4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging, in the alternative, infringement of the principle of proportionality Although it is true that, in accordance with Article H of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1164/94, the European Commission is empowered to make financial corrections as its deems necessary, and which may imply full or partial annulment of the aid granted for the project, it must observe the principle of proportionality, taking account of the circumstances of the individual case, such as the type of irregularity and the possible financial impact of potential deficiencies in the management or monitoring systems. In that regard, it is incomprehensible why it was regarded necessary to cancel all of the aid granted, since corrections at a rate of 100 % apply only when the deficiencies in the management and monitoring systems are so significant, or the irregularity found is so serious, as to constitute a complete disregard of European Union law rendering all of the payments improper. Difficulties in interpretation are a decisive attenuating circumstance which should always be taken into account by the European Commission. In the light of the circumstances described, less restrictive means exist — such as the application of a reduced rate or even no correction at all — to achieve the desired objective.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 252/36

Action brought on 17 June 2013 — Westermann Lernspielverlag/OHIM — Diset (bambinoLÜK)

(Case T-333/13)

2013/C 252/60

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Westermann Lernspielverlag GmbH (Braunschweig, Germany) (represented by: A. Nordemann, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Diset, SA (Barcelona, Spain)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) [OHIM] of 3 April 2013, Case R 1323/2012-2, relating to the opposition proceedings No. B 1 724 593 [Community trade mark application 009080359] between DISET, S.A. and Westermann Lernspielverlag GmbH;

— Order the Defendant to bear the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘bambinoLÜK’, for goods in classes 9, 16 and 28 — Community trade mark application No 9 080 359

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark of the figurative mark ‘BAMBINO’ for goods in classes 16, 28 and 41

Decision of the Opposition Division: Partly upheld the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Partly upheld the appeal and allows the CTM application to proceed for certain goods of class 9

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) Council Regulation No 207/2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 252/38

Action brought on 2 July 2013 — Jordi Nogues v OHIM — Grupo Osborne (BADTORO)

(Case T-350/13)

2013/C 252/65

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Jordi Nogues SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: J.R. Fernández Castellanos, M. J. Sanmartín Sanmartín and E. López Pares, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Grupo Osborne, SA (El Puerto de Santa María, Spain)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

— annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 16 April 2013 in Case R 1446/2012-2;

— order OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the applicant’s costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Applicant

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark with word element ‘BADTORO’ for goods and services in Classes 25, 34 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 9 565 581

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Grupo Osborne, SA

Mark or sign cited in opposition: National figurative mark with word element ‘TORO’, national word mark ‘EL TORO’ and Community word mark ‘TORO’, for goods and services in Classes 25, 34, 35

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Pleas in law:

— Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 274/22

Action brought on 2 August 2013 — Photo USA Electronic Graphic v Council

(Case T-394/13)

2013/C 274/37

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Photo USA Electronic Graphic, Inc. (Beijing, China) (represented by: K. Adamantopoulos, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 412/2013 of 13 May 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware originating in the People's Republic of China (OJ 2013 L 131, p. 1), insofar as it imposes an anti-dumping duty on the applicant, and

Order the defendant to pay the applicant’s costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.

First plea in law, alleging that the Commission and the Council (hereafter, ‘institutions’) made a manifest error of assessment by including plain polyester coated ceramic mugs in the scope of the product under investigation.

Second plea in law, alleging that, by grouping coated ceramic mugs with other types of stoneware tableware and kitchenware, the institutions failed to make a fair comparison in violation of Article 2(10) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ 2009 L 343, p. 51) (hereafter, ‘basic Regulation’).

Third plea in law, alleging that the institutions infringed Article 3(7) of the basic Regulation by failing to properly analyze the effects on the situation of the Union industry of the anti-competitive practices investigated by the Bundeskartellamt (German Competition Authority). In this respect, the applicant submits that the institutions made a manifest error of assessment by concluding that anti-competitive practices did not have an effect on micro- and macro-economic indicators.

Fourth plea in law, alleging that the institutions infringed Article 3(2) of the basic Regulation by failing to make an objective examination of the situation of the Union industry. In this respect, the applicant submits that the institutions made a manifest error of assessment by concluding that anti-competitive practices did not have an effect on micro- and macro-economic indicators
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 260/50

Action brought on 26 July 2013 — Intermark/OHIM — Coca-Cola (RIENERGY Cola)

(Case T-384/13)

2013/C 260/90

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Intermark Srl (Stei, Romania) (represented by: Á. László, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: The Coca-Cola Company (Atlanta, United States)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Uphold the application, alter the contested decision of the defendant, order the dismissal of the opposition and order the registration of the applicant’s sign as a trade mark in its entirety;

— In case the Court considers that it is inevitable to conduct another thorough analyses of the facts and evidence of the case, annul the contested decision of the defendant and remit the case to OHIM for further examination and new decision;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs of the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘Cola’ for goods and services in classes 32 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 9 507 963

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registrations No 8 792 475, No 2 107 118 and No 8 709 818 of the figurative mark ‘Coca-Cola’ for goods and services in classes 30, 32, 33 and 35

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 Council Regulation No 207/2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 291/5

Appeal brought on 22 August 2013 by Luigi Marcuccio against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 18 June 2013 in Case F-143/11, Marcuccio v Commission

(Case T-447/13 P)

2013/C 291/06

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought by the appellant

The appellant claims that the Court should:

— Annul in its entirety and without exception the order under appeal;

— Refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The present appeal is brought against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 18 June 2013 dismissing as manifestly inadmissible an action for (i) annulment of the Commission’s decision rejecting the appellant’s request of 16 August 2011 and for (ii) payment of the sum of EUR 3 316,31 in respect of part of the costs incurred for the purposes of Case F-81/09 Marcuccio v Commission.

In support of its claims, the appellant relies on the following pleas in law:

1. Absolute failure to state reasons in the order under appeal, distortion and misrepresentation of the facts.

2. Incorrect, false and unreasonable interpretation and application of: — the concept of ‘request’ within the meaning of Article 90 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union; — Article 91 of those regulations and illogical and unreasoned failure to have regard to the relevant case-law; — the concept of the obligation on an institution of the European Union to adopt the measures necessary for compliance with a judgment of the Courts of the European Union.

3. Absolute failure to carry out any preliminary investigations and to state reasons, and failure to rule on a claim made by the appellant in the proceedings.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 313/30

Action brought on 12 August 2013 — Gruppo Norton v OHIM — Marín Nicolás (Gruppo Norton S.r.l.)

(Case T-427/13)

2013/C 313/56

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Gruppo Norton Srl (Carini, Italy) (represented by: García Lirola, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Victoriano Marín Nicolás (Alcantarailla, Spain)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— deliver a judgment in which, ruling on the substance of the case, it upholds the registration of the trade mark for all of the goods in respect of which it is sought.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Gruppo Norton Srl

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘Gruppo Norton S.r.l.’ for goods in Classes 7 and 9 — Community trade mark application No 10 169 753

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Victoriano Marín Nicolás

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Spanish trade mark ‘NORTON HISPANO’ for goods in Class 9

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld in part

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Inadmissibility of the appeal

Pleas in law: Breach of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 304/22

Action brought on 21 August 2013 — Bora Creations v OHIM — Beauté Prestige International (essence)

(Case T-448/13)

2013/C 304/38

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Bora Creations, SL (Ceuta, Spain) (represented by: R. Lange, G. Hild and C.Pape, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Beauté Prestige International SA (Paris, France)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Annul the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 6 June 2013 given in Case R 1085/2012-5;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs of proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: The word mark ‘essence’ for goods in Classes 3, 4, 8, 14, 16, 21, 25 and 26 — Community trade mark registration No 6 816 144

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicant

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

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: Absolute grounds pursuant to Article 52(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (CTMR) (1), namely that the CTM was registered in breach of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) CTMR

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Rejected the application for a declaration of invalidity

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Allowed the appeal and declared the CTM partially invalid

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) CTMR.

(1) OJ L 78, p. 1
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 325/49

Action brought on 13 September 2013 — Schmidt Spiele v OHIM (Representation of a games board)

(Case T-493/13)

2013/C 325/78

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Schmidt Spiele GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by T. Sommer, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 July 2013 in Case R 1768/2012-1;

— Order OHIM to pay the costs;

— Set a date for the oral procedure.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: the figurative mark including the representation of a games board for goods and services in Classes 9, 16, 28 and 41 — Community trade mark application No 10 592 095

Decision of the Examiner: the application was rejected

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 325/34

Action brought on 14 August 2013 — Brouillard v Court of Justice

(Case T-420/13)

2013/C 325/57

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Alain Laurent Brouillard (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J.-M. Gouazé, lawyer)

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant requests the General Court to:

— annul the decision of 5 June 2013 of the Court of Justice of the European Union — Directorate-General for Translation — concerning contract 2013/S 047-075037, eliminating Mr Brouillard from the lot for translation into French;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By this action, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision to invite the candidate selected to tender in the context of a negotiated tender procedure relating to the conclusion of framework contracts for the translation of legal texts from certain official languages of the European Union into French (OJ 2013/S 47-075037) to submit a tender in which it is confirmed that the applicant will not be engaged in providing the services concerned on the ground that the applicant does not fulfil the full legal education requirement.

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law:

1. The first plea in law, alleging lack of competence of the authority which adopted the contested act.

2. Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Directives 2000/78/EC (1) and 2005/36/EC, (2) and the case-law of the Court of Justice.

3. Third plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment concerning the applicant's academic and professional qualifications.

(1) Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16).

(2) Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ 2005 L 255, p. 22).
2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the rejection of certain adjustments requested by the applicant violates Article 2(10) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 and Article 2.4 of the WTO Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994. In the alternative, the applicant considers that the Council violated Article 296 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 344/64

Action brought on 19 September 2013 — Ratioparts-Ersatzteile-Vertriebs v OHIM — IIC (NORTHWOOD)

(Case T-509/13)

2013/C 344/118

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Ratioparts-Ersatzteile-Vertriebs GmbH (Euskirchen, Germany) (represented by: M. Koch, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: IIC — Intersport International Corp. GmbH (Bern, Switzerland)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— alter the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of 4 July 2013 (Case R 2211/2012-2) in such a way that opposition No B17963622 is rejected in its entirety, and

— order the opponent to pay the costs of the opposition proceedings and the appellant to pay the costs of the appeal proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant

Community trade mark concerned: the figurative mark ‘NORTHWOOD’ for goods and services in Classes 8, 9, 20, 25 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 9 412 776

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: IIC — Intersport International Corp. GmbH

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the international registration with protection in respect of the European Union of the mark ‘NORTHBROOK’ for goods in Classes 9, 14, 18, 20, 22, 25 and 28

Decision of the Opposition Division: the opposition was upheld in part

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed in part

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 344/57

Action brought on 12 August 2013 — ‘Millano’ Krzysztof Kotas v OHIM (shape of boxes of chocolates)

(Case T-440/13)

2013/C 344/104

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Zakład Wyrobów Cukierniczych ‘Millano’ Krzysztof Kotas (Przeźmierowo, Poland) (represented by: B. Kański, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— set aside the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of 22 May 2013 in Case R 755/2012-2.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: the three-dimensional trade mark in the shape of boxes of chocolates for goods in Class 30 — application no 10 359 602

Decision of the Examiner: application for registration refused

Decision of the Board of Appeal: appeal dismissed

Pleas in law: breach of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 352/16

Action brought on 18 September 2013 — ASPA v OHIM — Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria (ARGENTARIA)

(Case T-502/13)

2013/C 352/31

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Argenta Spaarbank NV (ASPA) (Antwerp, Belgium) (represented by: K. De Winter and M. De Vroey, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, SA (Madrid, Spain)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 15 July 2013 given in Case R 1581/2011-4.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which an application for revocation has been made: The word mark ‘ARGENTARIA’ for goods and services in Classes 1 to 42 — Community trade mark No 159 707

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

Party applying for revocation of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Declared the cancellation proceedings closed following the surrender of the contested services by the CTM proprietor

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal as inadmissible

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 51 (1)(a) and 80 CTMR.
3.

Third plea in law, alleging that the behaviour of the Acting Director of Cedefop is at least questionable, when he claims that it is questionable whether the KMS-Steering Group Meetings Minutes, among the requested documents, have ever existed, as he should be aware of their existence (or non-existence), because he was Deputy Director of Cedefop during a long period (one year) that such documents were being produced. Such behaviour makes the investigation of the premises of Cedefop by the competent national authorities necessary.