CELEX: 62013TN0622
Language: en
Date: 2013-11-25 00:00:00
Title: Case T-622/13: Action brought on 25 November 2013 — Ratioparts-Ersatzteile v OHIM — Norwood Promotional Products Europe (NORTHWOOD professional forest equipment)

8.2.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 39/23
            
         Action brought on 25 November 2013 — Ratioparts-Ersatzteile v OHIM — Norwood Promotional Products Europe (NORTHWOOD professional forest equipment)
   (Case T-622/13)
   2014/C 39/41
   Language in which the application was lodged: German
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Ratioparts-Ersatzteile-Vertriebs GmbH (Euskirchen, Germany) (represented by: M. Koch, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Norwood Promotional Products Europe, SL (Tarragona, Spain)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               alter the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of 11 September 2013 (Case R 1244/2012-2) in such a way that opposition No B 176807 is rejected, and
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the opponent to pay the costs of the opposition proceedings and the appellant to pay the costs of the appeal proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant
   
      Community trade mark concerned: the figurative mark ‘NORTHWOOD’ for goods and services in Classes 8, 9, 20, 25 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 9412776
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Norwood Promotional Products Europe, SL
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community word mark ‘NORWOOD’ for goods in Class 35
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: the opposition was upheld
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009