CELEX: 62009TN0195
Language: en
Date: 2009-05-19 00:00:00
Title: Case T-195/09: Action brought on 19 May 2009 — Matkompaniet v OHIM — DF World of Spices (KATOZ)

1.8.2009   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 180/54
            
         Action brought on 19 May 2009 — Matkompaniet v OHIM — DF World of Spices (KATOZ)
   (Case T-195/09)
   2009/C 180/100
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicants: Matkompaniet AB (Borås, Sweden) (represented by: J. Gulliksson and J. Olsson, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: DF World of Spices GmbH (Dissen, Germany)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 11 March 2009 in case R 577/2008-2; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the defendant to pay the costs incurred both in the proceedings before the Court of First Instance and before OHIM.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant
   
      Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark “KATOZ”, for goods in classes 29, 30 and 31
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Mark or sign cited: German trade mark registration of the figurative mark “KATTUS” for goods in classes 29, 30, 31 and 33
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Upheld the appeal and partially rejected the application for the Community trade mark
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation 207/2009 as the Board of Appeal wrongly concluded that there was a likelihood of confusion between the trade marks concerned.