CELEX: 62009TN0129
Language: en
Date: 2009-04-02 00:00:00
Title: Case T-129/09: Action brought on 2 April 2009 — Bongrain v OHIM — Apetito (APETITO)

20.6.2009   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 141/47
            
         Action brought on 2 April 2009 — Bongrain v OHIM — Apetito (APETITO)
   (Case T-129/09)
   2009/C 141/98
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicants: Bongrain SA (Viroflay, France) (represented by: C. Hertz-Eichenrode, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Apetito AG (Rheine, Germany)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               Set aside the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 2 February 2009 in case R 720/2008-4; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order OHIM to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant
   
      Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘APETITO’, for goods in class 29 — application No 3 470 598
   
      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: Community trade mark registration of the word mark ‘apetito’ for goods in classes 5, 11, 21 29, 30, 37, 39, 41 and 42
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation 40/94 (1) (which became Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation 207/2009) as the Board of Appeal erred in its finding that there is similarity of goods and hence likelihood of confusion between the trade marks concerned.
   
      (1)  Replaced by Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark, OJ L 78, p. 1