CELEX: 62014TN0766
Language: en
Date: 2014-11-18 00:00:00
Title: Case T-766/14: Action brought on 18 November 2014  — Actega Terra v OHIM — Heidelberger Druckmaschinen (FoodSafe)

9.2.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 46/53
            
         Action brought on 18 November 2014 — Actega Terra v OHIM — Heidelberger Druckmaschinen (FoodSafe)
   (Case T-766/14)
   (2015/C 046/68)
   Language in which the application was lodged: German
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Actega Terra GmbH (Lehrte, Germany) (represented by: C. Onken, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG (Heidelberg, Germany)
   
      Details of the proceedings before OHIM
   
   
      Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: the applicant
   
      Trade mark at issue: the Community word mark ‘FoodSafe’ — Community trade mark No 9 502 551
   
      Procedure before OHIM: Invalidity proceedings
   
      Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 September 2014 in Case R 2440/2013-4
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               alter the contested decision to the effect that the Cancellation Division’s decision of 14 October 2013, filing number 6912 C, is annulled and the application for a declaration that Community trade mark No 9 502 551 is invalid is rejected;
            
         
               —
            
            
               in the alternative, annul the contested decision;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order OHIM to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law
   
   
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009.