CELEX: 62012TN0104
Language: en
Date: 2012-03-01 00:00:00
Title: Case T-104/12: Action brought on 1 March 2012 — Verus v OHIM — Performance Industries Manufacturing (VORTEX)

2.6.2012   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 157/7
            
         Action brought on 1 March 2012 — Verus v OHIM — Performance Industries Manufacturing (VORTEX)
   (Case T-104/12)
   2012/C 157/11
   Language in which the application was lodged: German
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Verus Eood (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: S. Vykydal, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Performance Industries Manufacturing, Inc. (Odessa, Florida, United States)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of 21 December 2011 in Case R 512/2011-4, VORTEX/VORTEX, and refer the case back to the Board of Appeal;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings before the Court and the Board of Appeal.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: Performance Industries Manufacturing Inc.
   
      Community trade mark concerned: word mark ‘VORTEX’ for goods in Classes 7 and 12 (Registration No 5 375 324).
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: the applicant.
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community word mark ‘VORTEX’, registered for services in Classes 35 and 39 (mark No 5 514 104).
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: rejection of the opposition.
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: dismissal of the appeal.
   
      Pleas in law: infringement of Article 8(2)(a) and (b) of Regulation No 207/2009, as there is a likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue.