Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 29.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 314/34 |

---

Action brought on 11 July 2016 — Bammer v EUIPO — mydays (Männerspielplatz)

(Case T-372/16)

(2016/C 314/46)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Alexander Bammer (Sindelfingen, Germany) (represented by: W. Riegger, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: mydays GmbH (Munich, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark ‘Männerspielplatz’ — European Union trade mark No 8 534 364

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 April 2016 in Case R 1796/2016-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | annul the contested decision; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs, including the costs incurred in the course of the appeal proceedings. |

Pleas in law

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | The Board of Appeal’s decision did not focus on the time of the application for registration in September 2009; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | The Board of Appeal did not sufficiently and appropriately take into account the extensive indicative value of the decisions of the Stuttgart courts; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | The Board of Appeal did not correctly assess the documents from 2009 notably as regards also the reasoning of the Stuttgart courts; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | In its reasoning, the Board of Appeal overlooked the fact that it imputed to the contested mark a meaning which, in any case, it did not have in 2009, on account of the fact that the designation showed no connection in particular to the registered goods and services; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | The mark at issue therefore has a distinctive character and is not descriptive of the registered goods and services. |

---

[Top](#document1)