do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-500/15: Order of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — LG Electronics v EUIPO — Cyrus Wellness Consulting (VIEWTY PRO) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Withdrawal of the application for registration — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2017-03-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, mobile phone, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017178EN.01001801.xml










6.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 178/18





Order of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — LG Electronics v EUIPO — Cyrus Wellness Consulting (VIEWTY PRO)
(Case T-500/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the application for registration - No need to adjudicate))
(2017/C 178/23)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (represented by: M. Graf, 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 intervening before the General Court: Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Wulff and U. Hildebrandt, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 June 2015 (Case R 1940/2014-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH and LG Electronics, Inc.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


LG Electronics, Inc., is ordered to bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH.






(1)  OJ C 354, 26.10.2015.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-03-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2017096EN.01000301.xml










28.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 96/3





Euro exchange rates (1)

27 March 2017
(2017/C 96/04)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0889 




JPY


Japanese yen


119,93 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4404 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86403 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,5503 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0713 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,2188 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,021 




HUF


Hungarian forint


310,21 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2641 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5491 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,9203 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4261 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4536 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,4584 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5416 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5149 




KRW


South Korean won


1 207,95 




ZAR


South African rand


13,7610 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,4895 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4395 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 486,06 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8055 




PHP


Philippine peso


54,516 




RUB


Russian rouble


61,8655 




THB


Thai baht


37,404 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,3980 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,4918 




INR


Indian rupee


70,8170 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8377 — SPIE/SAG) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-03-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: building industry, economic concentration, energy grid, merger control, provision of services, transmission network








C_2017096EN.01000102.xml










28.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 96/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8377 — SPIE/SAG)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 96/02)
On 20 March 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8377. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-498/15: Order of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — LG Electronics v EUIPO — Cyrus Wellness Consulting (Viewty) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Withdrawal of the application for registration — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2017-03-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, mobile phone, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017178EN.01001701.xml










6.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 178/17





Order of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — LG Electronics v EUIPO — Cyrus Wellness Consulting (Viewty)
(Case T-498/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the application for registration - No need to adjudicate))
(2017/C 178/21)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (represented by: M. Graf, 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 intervening before the General Court: Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Wulff and U. Hildebrandt, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 June 2015 (Joined Cases R 1935/2014-2 and R 1563/2014-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH and LG Electronics, Inc.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


LG Electronics, Inc., is ordered to bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH.






(1)  OJ C 337, 12.10.2015.
Case T-538/15: Judgment of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — Regent University v EUIPO — Regent’s College (REGENT UNIVERSITY) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark REGENT UNIVERSITY — Earlier national figurative mark REGENT’S COLLEGE — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2017-03-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, university








C_2017151EN.01003301.xml










15.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/33





Judgment of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — Regent University v EUIPO — Regent’s College (REGENT UNIVERSITY)
(Case T-538/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark REGENT UNIVERSITY - Earlier national figurative mark REGENT’S COLLEGE - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2017/C 151/41)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Regent University (Virginia Beach, Virginia, United States) (represented by: E. Himsworth QC and D. Wilkinson, Solicitor)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Regent’s College (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 July 2015 (Case R 1859/2014-2) relating to invalidity proceedings between Regent’s College and Regent University.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders the Regent University to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 371, 9.11.2015.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8430 — AÜW/Siemens/egrid) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-03-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: consultancy, distributive trades, economic concentration, merger control








C_2017096EN.01000501.xml










28.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 96/5





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8430 — AÜW/Siemens/egrid)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 96/06)






1.


On 17 March 2017, the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1), by which the undertaking Allgäuer Überlandwerk GmbH (‘AÜW’, Germany) and the undertaking SIEMENS AG (‘SIEMENS’, Germany) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the undertaking egrid applications & consulting GmbH (‘egrid’, Germany) by way of the purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Siemens: a global undertaking active in a range of business fields, particularly in the areas of digitalisation, automation and electrification;
—   for AÜW: a local energy provider and operator of a distribution network in Allgäu (Germany);
—   for egrid: consultancy services in the field of measuring, analysing and optimising distribution networks.










3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit to it their observations on the proposed operation.
Observations must reach the Commission no later than 10 days following the date of publication of this notification. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference M.8430 — AÜW/Siemens/egrid, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Case T-210/15: Judgment of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — Deutsche Telekom v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents relating to a procedure for the application of the competition rules — Refusal to grant access — Duty to state reasons — Exception relating to the protection of the commercial interests of a third party — Exception relating to the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits — Overriding public interest — Consultation with third parties — Transparency — No response to a confirmatory request with the time limits)
Date: 2017-03-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, disclosure of information, document, dominant position, provision of documents, telecommunications








C_2017151EN.01002902.xml










15.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/29





Judgment of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — Deutsche Telekom v Commission
(Case T-210/15) (1)

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to a procedure for the application of the competition rules - Refusal to grant access - Duty to state reasons - Exception relating to the protection of the commercial interests of a third party - Exception relating to the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits - Overriding public interest - Consultation with third parties - Transparency - No response to a confirmatory request with the time limits))
(2017/C 151/36)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Deutsche Telekom AG (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: A. Rosenfeld and O. Corzilius, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by J. Vondung and A. Buchet, and subsequently by F. Erlbacher, P. Van Nuffel and A. Dawes, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the Commission decision of 17 February 2015 refusing to grant the applicant access to documents relating to the procedure for abuse of dominant position with reference COMP/AT.40089 — Deutsche Telekom.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Deutsche Telekom AG is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 270, 17.8.2015.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8362 — Lonza Group/Capsugel) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-03-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, pharmaceutical industry








C_2017096EN.01000601.xml










28.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 96/6





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8362 — Lonza Group/Capsugel)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 96/07)






1.


On 17 March 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Lonza Group AG (Lonza, Switzerland) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Capsugel S.A. (Capsugel, Luxembourg) by way of a purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   Lonza: supply of services to the pharmaceutical, healthcare and life science industries, including contract development and manufacturing organisation services for biologics, fine chemicals, advanced intermediates and active pharmaceutical ingredients and manufacturing, development and commercialisation of active ingredients for use in consumer care, agriculture, water treatment, and coatings and composites,
—   Capsugel: design, development and manufacture of a range of dosage forms for the biopharmaceutical and health and nutrition industries, including solid oral dosage delivery products such as hard gelatine, soft gelatine, liquid filled and alternative polymer capsules.










3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference M.8362 — Lonza Group/Capsugel, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).
Case T-733/15: Judgment of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — Portugal v Commission (Failure to comply with a judgment of the Court of Justice finding that a State has failed to fulfil its obligations — Penalty payment — Decision quantifying the penalty payment — Repeal of the contested national measure — Date on which the infringement was brought to an end)
Date: 2017-03-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: infringement of EU law, liberalisation of the market, periodic penalty payment, public contract, public service, telecommunications, universal service








C_2017151EN.01003401.xml










15.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/34





Judgment of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — Portugal v Commission
(Case T-733/15) (1)

((Failure to comply with a judgment of the Court of Justice finding that a State has failed to fulfil its obligations - Penalty payment - Decision quantifying the penalty payment - Repeal of the contested national measure - Date on which the infringement was brought to an end))
(2017/C 151/43)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes and M. Figueiredo, acting as Agents, and L. Silva Morais, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Nicolae and P. Costa de Oliveira, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Commission Decision Ares(2015)4178538 of 8 October 2015 requesting payment by the Portuguese Republic of the sum of EUR 580 000, corresponding to the quantified penalty payment, for the period from 25 June to 21 August 2014, in compliance with the judgment of 25 June 2014, Commission v Portugal (C-76/13, not published, EU:C:2014:2029).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 68, 22.2.2016.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8087 — Smiths Group/Morpho Detection) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-03-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, security services








C_2017096EN.01000201.xml










28.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 96/2





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8087 — Smiths Group/Morpho Detection)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 96/03)
On 18 January 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8087. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-534/15: Order of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — LG Electronics v EUIPO — Cyrus Wellness Consulting (Viewty GT) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Withdrawal of the application for registration — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2017-03-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, mobile phone, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017178EN.01001802.xml










6.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 178/18





Order of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — LG Electronics v EUIPO — Cyrus Wellness Consulting (Viewty GT)
(Case T-534/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the application for registration - No need to adjudicate))
(2017/C 178/24)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (represented by: M. Graf, 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 intervening before the General Court: Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Wulff and U. Hildebrandt, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 June 2015 (Joined Cases R 1937/2014-2 and R 1564/2014-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH and LG Electronics, Inc.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


LG Electronics, Inc., is ordered to bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH.






(1)  OJ C 371, 9.11.2015.
Case T-499/15: Order of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — LG Electronics v EUIPO — Cyrus Wellness Consulting (VIEWTY SMILE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Withdrawal of the application for registration — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2017-03-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, mobile phone, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017178EN.01001702.xml










6.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 178/17





Order of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — LG Electronics v EUIPO — Cyrus Wellness Consulting (VIEWTY SMILE)
(Case T-499/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the application for registration - No need to adjudicate))
(2017/C 178/22)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (represented by: M. Graf, 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 intervening before the General Court: Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Wulff and U. Hildebrandt, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 June 2015 (Joined Cases R 1565/2014-2 and R 1939/2014-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH and LG Electronics, Inc.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


LG Electronics, Inc., is ordered to bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH.






(1)  OJ C 354, 26.10.2015.