CELEX: 62016TN0013
Language: en
Date: 2016-01-15 00:00:00
Title: Case T-13/16: Action brought on 15 January 2016 — Gauff v OHIM — H.P. Gauff Ingenieure (GAUFF)

7.3.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 90/23
            
         Action brought on 15 January 2016 — Gauff v OHIM — H.P. Gauff Ingenieure (GAUFF)
   (Case T-13/16)
   (2016/C 090/31)
   Language in which the application was lodged: German
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Gauff GmbH & Co. Engineering KG (Nuremberg, Germany) (represented by: A. Molnar)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: H.P. Gauff Ingenieure GmbH & Co. KG — JBG (Frankfurt am Main, Germany)
   
      Details of the proceedings before OHIM
   
   
      Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant
   
      Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘Gauff’ — Community mark No 6 327 977
   
      Procedure before OHIM: Invalidity proceedings
   
      Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 12 November 2015 in Case R 549/2015-1
   
      Form of order
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the contested decision; or
               in the alternative, send the case back to OHIM for further examination of the disputed matters that were, in error, not examined;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order OHIM to pay the costs of the proceedings including those incurred in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.
            
         
      Plea in law
   
   
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Articles 53, 56, 57, 76 of Regulation No 207/2009 and infringement of Regulation No 2868/95 as well as infringement of the right to be heard and failure to state reasons.