CELEX: 62013TA0050
Language: en
Date: 2014-11-18 00:00:00
Title: Case T-50/13: Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2014  — Think Schuhwerk v OHIM — Müller (VOODOO) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark VOODOO — Absolute grounds for refusal — Lack of descriptive character — Distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c)of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Bad faith — Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009)

12.1.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 7/32
            
         Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2014 — Think Schuhwerk v OHIM — Müller (VOODOO)
   (Case T-50/13) (1)
   
   ((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark VOODOO - Absolute grounds for refusal - Lack of descriptive character - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c)of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))
   (2015/C 007/34)
   Language of the case: German
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Think Schuhwerk GmbH (Kopfing, Austria) (represented by: M. Gail, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Schifko, acting as Agent)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Andreas Müller (Ulm, Germany) (represented by: J. Pick, lawyer)
   
      Re:
   
   Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 November 2012 (Case R 474/2012 4) concerning invalidity proceedings between Think Schuhwerk GmbH and Mr Andreas Müller
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               dismisses the action;
            
         
               2.
            
            
               orders Think Schuhwerk GmbH to pay the costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 86, 23.3.2013.