CELEX: 62014TN0345
Language: en
Date: 2014-05-19 00:00:00
Title: Case T-345/14: Action brought on 19 May 2014  — Quanzhou Wouxun Electronics v OHIM Locura Digital (WOUXUN)

21.7.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 235/30
            
         Action brought on 19 May 2014 — Quanzhou Wouxun Electronics v OHIM Locura Digital (WOUXUN)
   (Case T-345/14)
   2014/C 235/41
   Language in which the application was lodged: French
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Quanzhou Wouxun Electronics Co. Ltd (Quanzhou, China) (represented by: A. Sebastião and J. Pimenta, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Locura Digital, SL (Granollers, Spain)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 17 February 2014 in Case R 407/2013-4;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order OHIM to refuse to grant registration of the Community trade mark No 1 0 0 72  478‘WOUXUN’ in full
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order Locura Digital, SL to bear the costs of the proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: Locura Digital, SL
   
      Community trade mark concerned: Word mark WOUXUN for goods and services in Classes 9, 39 and 42 — Application for Community trade mark No 1 0 0 72  478
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Quanzhou Wouxun Electronics Co. Ltd
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: Word marks WOUXUN for goods and services in Classes 9, 35 and 38
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: The opposition was rejected in part
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009