CELEX: 62011TA0249
Language: en
Date: 2013-05-14 00:00:00
Title: Case T-249/11: Judgment of the General Court of 14 May 2013 — Sanco v OHIM — Marsalman (Representation of a chicken) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark representing a chicken — Earlier national figurative mark representing a chicken — Relative ground for refusal — Similarity between goods and services — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

22.6.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 178/8
            
         Judgment of the General Court of 14 May 2013 — Sanco v OHIM — Marsalman (Representation of a chicken)
   (Case T-249/11) (1)
   
   (Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark representing a chicken - Earlier national figurative mark representing a chicken - Relative ground for refusal - Similarity between goods and services - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
   2013/C 178/14
   Language of the case: Spanish
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Sanco, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: A. Segura Roda, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carillo, Agent)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Marsalman, SL (Barcelona, Spain)
   
      Re:
   
   Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 February 2011 (Case R 1073/2010-2), concerning opposition proceedings between Sanco, SA and Marsalman, SL
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 17 February 2011 (Case R 1073/2010-2);
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Dismisses the action as to the remainder;
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Orders OHIM to pay the costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 204, 9.7.2011.