CELEX: 62010TN0169
Language: en
Date: 2010-04-14 00:00:00
Title: Case T-169/10: Action brought on 14 April 2010 — Grupo Osborne v OHIM — Industria Licorera Quezalteca (TORO XL)

5.6.2010   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 148/49
            
         Action brought on 14 April 2010 — Grupo Osborne v OHIM — Industria Licorera Quezalteca (TORO XL)
   (Case T-169/10)
   2010/C 148/79
   Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Grupo Osborne SA (El Puerto de Santa María, Spain) (represented by: J. Iglesias Monravá, 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: Industria Licorera Quezalteca, SA
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision dated 22.01.2010 of the Board of Appeal of OHIM in Case R 223/2009-2 refusing registration of the Community trade mark No 4 769 279 TORO XL in Class 33;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Permit, consequently, registration of the Community trade mark No 4 769 279 TORO XL in Class 33, and
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the defendant to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: Grupo Osborne.
   
      Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘TORO XL’ (application for registration No 4 769 279) for goods and services in Classes 32, 33 and 43.
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Industria Licorera Quezalteca, SA.
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community figurative mark (No 4 027 124) containing the expression ‘XL’ for goods in Class 33 (alcoholic drinks).
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition rejected.
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Opposition upheld and application for registration refused.
   
      Pleas in law: Incorrect interpretation of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark.