Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 21.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/55 |

---

Action brought on 16 November 2018 — Twitter v EUIPO — Hachette Filipacchi Presse (PERISCOPE)

(Case T-682/18)

(2019/C 25/72)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Twitter, Inc. (San Francisco, California, United States) (represented by: I. Fowler, Solicitor and J. Schmitt, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Hachette Filipacchi Presse SA (Levallois Perret, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark PERISCOPE — Application for registration No 13 837 794

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 September 2018 in Case R 2315/2016-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | annul the contested decision in so far as it held that (a) the earlier French mark no. 3 366 460 had been genuinely used for ‘software and computer programs’ in class 9, and (b) that there is a likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue for goods and services in classes 9, 41, 42 and 45; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the defendant and the other party before the Board of Appeal if it joins the proceedings as intervener. |

Pleas in law

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Infringement of Article 42(2) and (3) of the Council Regulation (EC) 207/2009; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of the Council Regulation (EC) 207/2009. |

---

[Top](#document1)