do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-375/16: Action brought on 13 July 2016 — Sabre GLBL v EUIPO (INSTASITE)
Date: 2016-07-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, consultancy, marketing, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2016326EN.01003001.xml










5.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 326/30





Action brought on 13 July 2016 — Sabre GLBL v EUIPO (INSTASITE)
(Case T-375/16)
(2016/C 326/52)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sabre GLBL, Inc. (Southlake, Texas, United States) (represented by: J. Zecher, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘INSTASITE’ — Application for registration No 13 882 162

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 April 2016 in Case R 1742/2015-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Plea in law

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-381/16: Action brought on 13 July 2016 — Düll v EUIPO — Cognitect (DaToMo)
Date: 2016-07-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, consultancy, information technology industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016364EN.01001401.xml










3.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 364/14






Action brought on 13 July 2016 — Düll v EUIPO — Cognitect (DaToMo)
(Case T-381/16)
(2016/C 364/10)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Klaus Düll (Südergellersen, Germany) (represented by: S. Wolff-Marting, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Cognitect, Inc. (Durham, North Carolina, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘DaToMo’ — EU trade mark No 6 715 627

Procedure before EUIPO: Revocation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 April 2016 in Joined Cases R 1383/2015-2 and R 1481/2015-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


alter the contested decision to the effect that the restriction ‘all the aforementioned for the enterprise mobility management (EMM)’ is not added to the services which, following the abovementioned decision, remain listed in the class specification for Class 42 in the list of goods and services covered by trade mark No 6715627 DaToMo;










—


order EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicant.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 50 of Regulation No 40/94.