CELEX: 62013TN0521
Language: en
Date: 2013-09-19 00:00:00
Title: Case T-521/13: Action brought on 19 September 2013 — Alpinestars Research v OHIM — Tung Cho et Wang Yu (A ASTER)

30.11.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 352/20
            
         Action brought on 19 September 2013 — Alpinestars Research v OHIM — Tung Cho et Wang Yu (A ASTER)
   (Case T-521/13)
   2013/C 352/37
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Alpinestars Research Srl (Coste di Maser, Italy) (represented by: G. Dragotti and R. Valenti, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Kean Tung Cho (Taichung City, Taiwan); and Ling-Yuan Wang Yu (Wuci Township, Taiwan)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 15 July 2013 given in Case R 2309/2012-4;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the defendant to pay the costs of proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark in black and white containing the verbal elements ‘A ASTER’ for goods in Classes 18 and 25 — Community trade mark application No 7 084 395
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: The word mark ‘A-STARS’ for goods in Classes 9, 12, 14, 18, 25 and 28 — Community trade mark No 6 181 002
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition in its entirety
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) CTMR.