CELEX: 62013TN0350
Language: en
Date: 2013-07-02 00:00:00
Title: Case T-350/13: Action brought on 2 July 2013 — Jordi Nogues v OHIM — Grupo Osborne (BADTORO)

31.8.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 252/38
            
         Action brought on 2 July 2013 — Jordi Nogues v OHIM — Grupo Osborne (BADTORO)
   (Case T-350/13)
   2013/C 252/65
   Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Jordi Nogues SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: J.R. Fernández Castellanos, M. J. Sanmartín Sanmartín and E. López Pares, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Grupo Osborne, SA (El Puerto de Santa María, Spain)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the General Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 16 April 2013 in Case R 1446/2012-2;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the applicant’s costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: Applicant
   
      Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark with word element ‘BADTORO’ for goods and services in Classes 25, 34 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 9 565 581
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Grupo Osborne, SA
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: National figurative mark with word element ‘TORO’, national word mark ‘EL TORO’ and Community word mark ‘TORO’, for goods and services in Classes 25, 34, 35
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed
   
      Pleas in law:
   
   
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009
            
         
               —
            
            
               Incorrect departure from the general principle of comparison as a whole, without valid reason