CELEX: 62013TN0024
Language: en
Date: 2013-01-21 00:00:00
Title: Case T-24/13: Action brought on 21 January 2013 — Cactus/OHIM — Del Rio Rodríguez (CACTUS OF PEACE CACTUS DE LA PAZ)

6.4.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 101/20
            
         Action brought on 21 January 2013 — Cactus/OHIM — Del Rio Rodríguez (CACTUS OF PEACE CACTUS DE LA PAZ)
   (Case T-24/13)
   2013/C 101/43
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Cactus SA (Bertrange, Luxembourg) (represented by: K. Manhaeve, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Isabel Del Rio Rodríguez (Malaga, Spain)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of 19 October 2012;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the Defendant and — if applicable — Isabel Del Rio Rodriguez to jointly and severally pay all the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘CACTUS OF PEACE CACTUS DE LA PAZ’, for goods and services in classes 31, 39 and 44 — Community trade mark application No 8 489 643
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 963 694 of the word mark ‘CACTUS’ for goods and services in classes 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 16, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 39, 41 and 42
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld in part and application rejected in part
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the appealed decision and rejection of the opposition in its entirety
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 76(1) and (2) and 75 of Council Regulation No 207/2009.