CELEX: 62017TN0171
Language: en
Date: 2017-03-17 00:00:00
Title: Case T-171/17: Action brought on 17 March 2017 — M & K v EUIPO — Genfoot (KIMIKA)

8.5.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 144/57
            
         Action brought on 17 March 2017 — M & K v EUIPO — Genfoot (KIMIKA)
   (Case T-171/17)
   (2017/C 144/77)
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: M & K Srl (Prato, Italy) (represented by: F. Caricato, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Genfoot, Inc. (Montreal, Québec, Canada)
   
      Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
   
   
      Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant
   
      Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘KIMIKA’ — Application for registration No 13 233 391
   
      Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings
   
      Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 January 2017 in Case R 1206/2016-4
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               recognize and declare that the recourse presented by the applicant is admissible and well founded; and consequently
            
         
               —
            
            
               reform the contested decision;
            
         
               —
            
            
               send the case back to EUIPO for a reforming decision and therefore give way to a definitive registration of the EU trade mark No 13 233 391 even in the classes contested;
            
         
               —
            
            
               condemn the counterpart to pay fees and costs of the three proceeding.
            
         
      Pleas in law
   
   
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 15 of Regulation No 207/2009;
            
         
               —
            
            
               The Board of Appeal erred when it assessed the risk of confusion between the trade marks.