CELEX: 62010TN0053
Language: en
Date: 2010-02-05 00:00:00
Title: Case T-53/10: Action brought on 5 February 2010 — Riesenthel v OHIM — Dynamic Promotion (Hampers, crates and baskets)

17.4.2010   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 100/56
            
         Action brought on 5 February 2010 — Riesenthel v OHIM — Dynamic Promotion (Hampers, crates and baskets)
   (Case T-53/10)
   2010/C 100/83
   Language in which the application was lodged: German
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Peter Riesenthel (Gilching, Germany) (represented by: E. Aliki Busse, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Dynamic Promotion Co. Ltd (Bangkok, Thailand)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 6 November 2009 and 10 December 2009 (Case R 621/2009-3);
            
         
               —
            
            
               in the alternative, order restitutio in integrum in relation to the applicant;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order OHIM to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Community design No 2 179 550 001 for ‘Hampers, crates and baskets’
   
      Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Dynamic Promotion Co. Ltd
   
      Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: Peter Riesenthel
   
      Decision of the Cancellation Division: Dismissal of the application for a declaration of invalidity
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Rejection of the appeal as inadmissible
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of the right to be heard and incorrect exercise of discretion by the Board of Appeal