CELEX: 62008TJ0479
Language: en
Date: 2011-09-29
Title: Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 September 2011. # adidas AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). # Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for a Community figurative mark representing a shoe with two stripes on the side - Earlier national trade mark representing a shoe with three stripes on the side - Relative ground for refusal - Failure to substantiate the earlier right - Failure to translate elements essential to substantiating the registration of the earlier trade mark - Rule 16(3), Rule 17(2) and Rule 20(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95. # Case T-479/08.

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 September 2011 – adidas v OHIM – Patrick Holding (Representation of a
            shoe with two stripes)
      (Case T-479/08)
      Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for a Community figurative mark representing a shoe with two stripes on the side – Earlier national trade mark representing a shoe with three stripes on the side – Relative ground for refusal – Failure to substantiate the earlier right – Failure to translate elements essential to substantiating the registration of the earlier trade mark – Rule 16(3), Rule 17(2) and Rule 20(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95
      Community trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Failure, within the prescribed period, to produce the translation of the certificate of registration of the earlier national
         mark – Impact on the procedure before the Opposition Division (Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rule 17(2)) (see paras
         32-33)
      
      Re:
      
         
               ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 August 2008 (Case R 849/2007-2) relating to
                  opposition proceedings between adidas AG and Patrick Holding ApS.
               
            Operative part
      The Court:
      
         
                  1.
               
               
                  
               
               
                  	Dismisses the action;
               
            
         
                  2.
               
               
                  
               
               
                  	Orders adidas AG to pay the costs.