Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 16.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 89/33 |

---

Action brought on 16 January 2015 — Gómez Echevarría/OHIM — M and M Direct (wax by Yuli’s)

(Case T-19/15)

(2015/C 089/40)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Yuleidy Caridad Gómez Echevarría (Benalmádena, Spain) (represented by: E. López-Chicheri y Selma, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: M and M Direct Ltd (London, United Kingdom)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘wax by Yuli’s’ — Community trade mark No 9 0 99  367

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 November 2014 in Case R 951/2014-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 November 2014, and order the applicant for a declaration of invalidity to pay the costs of the proceedings contesting the trade mark as well as those of the present proceedings; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | in the alternative, should the form of order sought above not be granted, alter the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 November 2014 and dismiss the application for a declaration that Community trade mark No 9 0 99  367‘wax by Yuli’s’ is invalid, and order the applicant for a declaration of invalidity to pay the costs of the proceedings contesting the trade mark as well as those of the present proceedings; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | in the further alternative, should the forms of order sought above not be granted, alter the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 November 2014 as to the costs and set aside those incurred in connection with representation in the appeal against the decision of the Cancellation Division of OHIM. |

Pleas in law

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Infringement of Article 64 of Regulation No 207/2009, read in conjunction with Article 41(2)(a) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 in that the application for a declaration that the trade mark was invalid was made by way of an abuse of power. |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Incorrect application and interpretation of Article 53(1)(a), read in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009, in that there is no likelihood of confusion. |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Incorrect application and interpretation of Rule 94(1) and (7) of Commission Regulation No 2868/95, read in conjunction with Article 85(1) of Regulation No 207/2009. |

---

[Top](#document1)