CELEX: 62011CN0655
Language: en
Date: 2011-12-20 00:00:00
Title: Case C-655/11 P: Appeal brought on 20 December 2011 by Seven for all mankind LLC against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 6 October 2011 in Case T-176/10: Seven SpA v Office of Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

3.3.2012   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 65/7
            
         Appeal brought on 20 December 2011 by Seven for all mankind LLC against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 6 October 2011 in Case T-176/10: Seven SpA v Office of Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   (Case C-655/11 P)
   2012/C 65/14
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Appellant: Seven for all mankind LLC (represented by: A. Gautier-Sauvagnac, avocat)
   
      Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The appellant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 6 October 2011, notified on October 7, 2011 (Case T-176/10),
            
         
               —
            
            
               Confirm the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the OHIM of January 28, 2010, notified on February 15, 2010 (Case R 1514/2008-2),
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order Seven SpA to pay, in addition to its own costs, the costs of Seven For All Mankind, in the present proceedings and in the proceedings before the OHIM.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   The applicant submits that the contested judgment should be set aside on the following grounds:
   
               —
            
            
               Firstly, the General Court committed a breach of procedure affecting the interests of the Appellant when assessing the distinctive character of the word SEVEN
            
         
               —
            
            
               Secondly, the General Court did not fulfil the requirements of settled case-law in assessing the notion of similarity between the trademarks referred to in Article 8(1)(b) of CTMR and did not take into account all factors relevant to the circumstances of the case.