CELEX: 62016TN0900
Language: en
Date: 2016-12-21 00:00:00
Title: Case T-900/16: Action brought on 21 December 2016 — Casual Dreams v EUIPO — López Fernández (Dayaday)

27.3.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 95/12
            
         Action brought on 21 December 2016 — Casual Dreams v EUIPO — López Fernández (Dayaday)
   (Case T-900/16)
   (2017/C 095/21)
   Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Casual Dreams, SLU (Manresa, Spain) (represented by: A. Tarí Lázaro, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Miguel Ángel López Fernández (Fuensalida, Spain)
   
      Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
   
   
      Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark containing the word element ‘Dayaday’ — Application for registration No 13 243 563
   
      Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings
   
      Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 November 2016 in Case R 375/2016-2
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the Decision of the Second Board of Appeal adopted on 6 October 2016 in Case R 375/2016-2 dismissing in part the appeal against the decision of the Opposition Division of EUIPO No B 2 469 545 of 17 December 2015;
            
         
               —
            
            
               dismiss the application for registration of the EU trademark No 13 243 563 filed by the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal for all the goods in Class 9 and the portion of the goods in Classes 16 and 24 in respect of which the Second Board of Appeal has dismissed the appeal;
            
         
               —
            
            
               in the alternative, partially annul the contested decision, pursuant to Article 8(5) (EUTMR), in so far as it confirms the dismissal of the opposition and the appeal in respect of the goods in Classes 9, 16 and 24 and refer the matter back to the Board of Appeal for review in its entirety in respect of the relative ground referred to in the abovementioned article;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order EUIPO to pay the costs, including the costs incurred by the applicant in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.
            
         
      Pleas in law
   
   
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation No 207/2009.