Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 4.12.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 328/36 |

---

Action brought on 23 September 2010 — Apple v OHMI — Iphone Media (IPH IPHONE)

(Case T-448/10)

()

2010/C 328/63

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Apple, Inc. (Cupertino, USA) (represented by: M. Engelman, barrister and J. Olsen, solicitor)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Iphone Media, SA (Seville, Spain)

Form of order sought

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 21 July 2010 in case R 1084/2009-4; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Uphold the applicant’s opposition; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | In the alternative, then applicant requests that its opposition be upheld in respect of such goods and services for which it is found that a likelihood of confusion exists and/or for such goods and services where it is determined there exists a risk of the Application Mark taking unfair advantage of, or being detrimental to, the distinctive character or repute of the applicant’s mark; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Order the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs of the proceedings |

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘IPH IPHONE’, for goods and services in classes 16, 35, 38, 41 and 42 — Community trade mark application No 5562822

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

Mark or sign cited: Community trade mark registration No 2901007 of the word mark ‘IPHONE’, for goods and services in classes 9, 38 and 42

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition partially

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: The applicant considers that the contested decision infringes Articles 8(1)(b) and 8(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal misapplied the provisions of these articles to the contested trade mark.

---

[Top](#document1)