CELEX: 62016TN0030
Language: en
Date: 2016-01-26 00:00:00
Title: Case T-30/16: Action brought on 26 January 2016 — M.I. Industries v OHIM — Natural Instinct (Natural Instinct Dog and Cat food as nature intended)

21.3.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 106/40
            
         Action brought on 26 January 2016 — M.I. Industries v OHIM — Natural Instinct (Natural Instinct Dog and Cat food as nature intended)
   (Case T-30/16)
   (2016/C 106/47)
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: M.I. Industries, Inc. (Lincoln, United States) (represented by: T. Elias, Barrister, B. Cookson, Solicitor)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Natural Instinct Ltd (Camberley, United Kingdom)
   
      Details of the proceedings before OHIM
   
   
      Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘Natural Instinct Dog and Cat food as nature intended’ — Application for registration No 11 438 074
   
      Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings
   
      Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 November 2015 in Case R 2944/2014-5
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the contested decision;
            
         
               —
            
            
               the applicant’s opposition No B 002 181 272 be upheld and NIL’s application No 11 438 074 be refused; alternatively, declare that the applicant has proved use its CTMs No 5 208 418 and No 5 208 201 for the purposes of the opposition No B 002 181 272, and remit the matter to the Fifth Board of Appeal for a determination of the issues arising in respect of each of those marks under Article 8(1)(b) CTMR; in the further alternative, remit the matter back to the Fifth Board of Appeal in its entirety;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to pay to the applicant the applicant’s costs of and occasioned by this appeal.
            
         
      Pleas in law
   
   
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 42(2) Regulation No 207/2009;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Rule 22(3) and (4) of Regulation No 2868/95;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) Regulation No 207/2009;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 75 Regulation No 207/2009.