CELEX: 62018TA0378
Language: en
Date: 2019-09-19 00:00:00
Title: Case T-378/18: Judgment of the General Court of 19 September 2019 — NHS v EUIPO — HLC SB Distribution (CRUZADE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark CRUZADE — Earlier EU figurative mark SANTA CRUZ — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Enhanced distinctiveness of the earlier mark)

2.12.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 406/31
            
         
      Judgment of the General Court of 19 September 2019 — NHS v EUIPO — HLC SB Distribution (CRUZADE)
      (Case T-378/18) (1)
      
      (EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark CRUZADE - Earlier EU figurative mark SANTA CRUZ - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Enhanced distinctiveness of the earlier mark)
      (2019/C 406/41)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: NHS, Inc. (Santa Cruz, California, United States) (represented by: P. Olson, lawyer)
      
         Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: V. Ruzek and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)
      
         Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: HLC SB Distribution, SL (Irún, Spain)
      
         Re:
      
      Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 April 2018 (Case R 1217/2017-5), relating to opposition proceedings between NHS and HLC SB Distribution.
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      The Court:
      
                  1.
               
               
                  
                     Dismisses the action;
                  
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  
                     Orders NHS, Inc., to pay the costs.
                  
               
            
         (1)  OJ C 276, 6.8.2018.