CELEX: 62014TN0081
Language: en
Date: 2014-02-06 00:00:00
Title: Case T-81/14: Action brought on 6 February 2014 — Energy Brands v OHIM — Smart Wines (SMARTWATER)

5.5.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 135/47
            
         Action brought on 6 February 2014 — Energy Brands v OHIM — Smart Wines (SMARTWATER)
   (Case T-81/14)
   2014/C 135/60
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Energy Brands, Inc. (New York, United States) (represented by: D. Stone and R. Allos, Solicitors)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Smart Wines GmbH (Cologne, Germany)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 19 November 2013 given in Case R 903/2013-2;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order OHIM and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to bear their own costs and those of the applicant.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
   
      Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘SMARTWATER’ for goods in Classes 30, 32 and 33 — Community trade mark application No 8 400 194
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: Earlier Community trade mark registration No 5 853 601 for the word mark ‘SMART WINES’ for goods in Classes 30 and 33
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in its entirety
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(a)(b) and 8(5) CTMR.