CELEX: 62014TN0267
Language: en
Date: 2014-04-23 00:00:00
Title: Case T-267/14: Action brought on 23 April 2014  — Zehnder Group International v OHIM — Stiebel Eltron (comfotherm)

24.6.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 194/33
            
         Action brought on 23 April 2014 — Zehnder Group International v OHIM — Stiebel Eltron (comfotherm)
   (Case T-267/14)
   2014/C 194/43
   Language in which the application was lodged: German
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Zehnder Group International AG (Gränichen, Switzerland) (represented by: J. Krenzel, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Stiebel Eltron GmbH & Co. KG (Holzminden, Germany)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of 21 February 2014 in Case R 1318/2013-4;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the defendant to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: the word mark ‘comfotherm’ for goods in Classes 9 and 11 — Community trade mark No 8 8 59  472
   
      Proprietor of the Community trade mark: the applicant
   
      Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: Stiebel Eltron GmbH & Co. KG
   
      Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: the word mark ‘KOMFOTHERM’ for goods in Class 11
   
      Decision of the Cancellation Division: the application for a declaration of invalidity was granted
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed
   
      Pleas in law: the contested decision does not stand up to scrutiny as regards the finding in respect of the similarity of the goods