CELEX: 62014TN0420
Language: en
Date: 2014-06-11 00:00:00
Title: Case T-420/14: Action brought on 11 June 2014 — Wine in Black v OHIM — Quinta do Noval — Vinhos (Wine in Black)

8.9.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 303/33
            
         Action brought on 11 June 2014 — Wine in Black v OHIM — Quinta do Noval — Vinhos (Wine in Black)
   (Case T-420/14)
   2014/C 303/41
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Wine in Black GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Bauer and V. Ahmann, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Quinta do Noval — Vinhos, SA (Pinhão, Portugal)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Fully set aside the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 6 March 2014 in Case R 1601/2013-1;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Award the costs of the proceedings against the defendant and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
   
      Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘Wine in Black’ for goods and services in classes 33, 35 and 42 — Community trade mark application No 1 0 9 49  071
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Quinta do Noval — Vinhos, SA
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: The word mark ‘NOVAL BLACK’ for goods in class 33
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: The opposition was upheld
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was dismissed
   
      Pleas in law: Violation of Art. 8 (1) (b) of Regulation No 207/2009