CELEX: 62018TN0522
Language: en
Date: 2018-08-28 00:00:00
Title: Case T-522/18: Action brought on 28 August 2018 — BGC Partners v EUIPO — Bankgirocentralen BGC (AUREL BGC)

29.10.2018   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 392/35
            
         
      Action brought on 28 August 2018 — BGC Partners v EUIPO — Bankgirocentralen BGC (AUREL BGC)
      (Case T-522/18)
      (2018/C 392/43)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: BGC Partners LP (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: P. Walsh, lawyer)
      
         Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
      
         Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Bankgirocentralen BGC AB (Stockholm, Sweden)
      
         Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
      
      
         Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court
      
         Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark AUREL BGC — Application for registration No 11 092 707
      
         Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings
      
         Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 June 2018 in Case R 2194/2014-5.
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the contested decision, in so far as the Board of Appeal determined that the application should be rejected for specific services in classes 35 and 36;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order EUIPO and the intervener to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the present proceedings;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  alter the contested decision with regard to the order for costs and order, pursuant to Article 134(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, the unsuccessful intervener to pay the costs incurred in the Board of Appeal and the opposition proceedings.
               
            
         Pleas in law
      
      
                  —
               
               
                  The Board of Appeal incorrectly found that evidence of use was sufficient to demonstrate genuine use of the mark;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.