CELEX: 62013TN0001
Language: en
Date: 2013-01-04 00:00:00
Title: Case T-1/13: Action brought on 4 January 2013 — Advance Magazine Publishers/OHIM — Montres Tudor (GLAMOUR)

23.3.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 86/18
            
         Action brought on 4 January 2013 — Advance Magazine Publishers/OHIM — Montres Tudor (GLAMOUR)
   (Case T-1/13)
   2013/C 86/29
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc. (New York, United States) (represented by: T. Raab, H. Lauf 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: Montres Tudor SA (Geneva, Switzerland)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Fully set aside the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for the Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 10 October 2012, appeal no. R 0231/2012-2;
            
         
               —
            
            
               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 ‘GLAMOUR’ Community trade mark application No 9 380 916
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: International registration with effect in the Community, ‘TUDOR GLAMOUR’ for goods in class 14
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition for all the contested goods
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009.