CELEX: 62012TN0549
Language: en
Date: 2012-12-26 00:00:00
Title: Case T-549/12: Action brought on 26 December 2012 — Nemeco/OHIM — Coca-Cola (NU)

2.3.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 63/21
            
         Action brought on 26 December 2012 — Nemeco/OHIM — Coca-Cola (NU)
   (Case T-549/12)
   2013/C 63/42
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Nemeco (Paris, France) (represented by: E. Gaspar, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: The Coca-Cola Company (Atlanta, United States)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision rendered by the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Marked (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) on October 16, 2012 (Case No. R 266/2012-2);
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay Nemeco’s costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
   
      Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘NU’, for goods in class 32 — International Registration No 1 033 122 designating the European Union
   
      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: Community trade mark registration No 5386081 of the word mark ‘NU YU’, for goods in classes 29, 30 and 32
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in its entirety
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009.