CELEX: 62019TN0080
Language: en
Date: 2019-02-12 00:00:00
Title: Case T-80/19: Action brought on 12 February 2019 — Dekoback v EUIPO — DecoPac (DECOPAC)

1.4.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 122/27
            
         
      Action brought on 12 February 2019 — Dekoback v EUIPO — DecoPac (DECOPAC)
      (Case T-80/19)
      (2019/C 122/31)
      Language in which the application was lodged: German
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: Dekoback GmbH (Helmstadt-Bargen, Germany) (represented by: V. von Moers, lawyer)
      
         Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
      
         Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: DecoPac, Inc. (Anoka, Minnesota, United States)
      
         Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
      
      
         Proprietor of the mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
      
         Mark at issue: EU word mark DECOPAC — EU trade mark No 160 747
      
         Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings
      
         Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 November 2018 in Case R 1795/2017-5
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the contested decision and declare invalid, in its entirety, the trade mark DECOPAC registered for the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.
               
            
         Pleas in law
      
      
                  —
               
               
                  No confidentiality of business data;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  Infringement of the right to be heard;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  No submission of invoices to any significant extent;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  No use of the trade mark as the other party’s own brand;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  Sale also to consumers was planned but did not take place;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  A distinction between edible and inedible decorations is necessary.