CELEX: 62013TN0196
Language: en
Date: 2013-04-05 00:00:00
Title: Case T-196/13: Action brought on 5 April 2013 — Nanu-Nana Joachim Hoepp/OHIM — Stal-Florez Botero (la nana)

15.6.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 171/31
            
         Action brought on 5 April 2013 — Nanu-Nana Joachim Hoepp/OHIM — Stal-Florez Botero (la nana)
   (Case T-196/13)
   2013/C 171/59
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Nanu-Nana Joachim Hoepp GmbH & Co. KG (Bremen, Germany) (represented by: T. Boddien, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Lina M. Stal-Florez Botero (Maarssen, Netherlands)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the Decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office of Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 29 January 2013 in case R 300/2012-1, relating to cancellation proceedings No. 000005025 C (Community trademark No. 005205125) between Nanu-Nana Joachim Hoepp GmbH & Co. KG and Lina M. Stal-Florez Botero h.o.d.n. La Nana;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the Defendant to bear the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: The figurative mark ‘la nana’ for goods of classes 16, 20 and 24 — Community trade mark registration No 5 205 125
   
      Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: The applicant
   
      Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: The grounds of the request for a declaration of invalidity were those laid down in Article 8(1)(b), in conjunction with Article 53(1)(a) of Council Regulation No 207/2009
   
      Decision of the Cancellation Division: Rejected the request for invalidity in its entirety based on Article 57(2) and (3) of Council Regulation No 207/2009
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 53(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b), Article 57(2) and (3) and Article 78 (1)(f) of Council Regulation No 207/2009.