CELEX: C2007/056/55
Language: en
Date: 2007-03-10 00:00:00
Title: Case T-92/05: Order of the Court of First Instance of 6 December 2006 — movingpeople.net International BV v OHIM — Schäfer (movingpeople.net) (Community trade mark — Community figurative trade mark movingpeople.net — Opposition of the proprietor of the national word mark MOVING PEOPLE — Partial refusal of registration — Applicant's acquisition of the earlier trade mark — No need to adjudicate)

10.3.2007   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 56/28
            
         Order of the Court of First Instance of 6 December 2006 — movingpeople.net International BV v OHIM — Schäfer (movingpeople.net)
   (Case T-92/05) (1)
   
   (Community trade mark - Community figurative trade mark movingpeople.net - Opposition of the proprietor of the national word mark MOVING PEOPLE - Partial refusal of registration - Applicant's acquisition of the earlier trade mark - No need to adjudicate)
   (2007/C 56/55)
   Language of the case: English
   Parties
   
      Applicant: movingpeople.net International BV (Helmond, Netherlands) (represented by: G. van Roeyen and T. Berendsen, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Laitinen, Agent)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Thomas Schäfer (Groß Schlamin, Schashagen, Germany) (represented by: D. Rohmeyer, lawyer)
   Re:
   Action for annulment brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 December 2004 (Case R 410/2004-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Thomas Schäfer and movingpeople.net International BV
   Operative part of the judgment
   
               1.
            
            
               There is no need to adjudicate on the action.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               The applicant is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the defendant.
            
         
               3.
            
            
               The intervener is to bear its own costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 115, 14.5.2005.