CELEX: 62011TN0326
Language: en
Date: 2011-06-20 00:00:00
Title: Case T-326/11: Action brought on 20 June 2011 — Brainlab v OHIM (BrainLAB)

10.9.2011   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 269/50
            
         Action brought on 20 June 2011 — Brainlab v OHIM (BrainLAB)
   (Case T-326/11)
   2011/C 269/111
   Language of the case: German
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Brainlab AG (Feldkirchen, Germany) (represented by J. Bauer, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      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 April 2011 in Case R 1596/2010-4;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Refer the case back to the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) for a decision on the question whether all due care was taken in respect of the renewal of the relevant Community trade mark BrainLAB, No 1 290 113;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the defendant to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Community trade mark concerned: the word mark BrainLAB for goods and services in Classes 9, 10 and 42
   
      Decision of the department ‘Register and associated databases’: Dismissal of the application for restitutio in integrum as regards the time-limit for filing the request for renewal and paying the renewal fee
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the application for restitutio in integrum and finding that Community trade mark No 1 290 113 had expired
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 81 of Regulation No 207/2009 as it was not possible for any of the parties, in spite of all due care required by the circumstances having been taken, to comply with a time-limit vis-à-vis the defendant, as a result of which the loss of a right occurred and the two-month time-limit for the filing of the application for restitutio in integrum was complied with.