CELEX: 62019TN0591
Language: en
Date: 2019-08-28 00:00:00
Title: Case T-591/19: Action brought on 28 August 2019 – Healios v EUIPO – Helios Kliniken (Healios)

28.10.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 363/25
            
         
      Action brought on 28 August 2019 – Healios v EUIPO – Helios Kliniken (Healios)
      (Case T-591/19)
      (2019/C 363/33)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: Healios KK (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: P. Venohr, lawyer)
      
         Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
      
         Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Helios Kliniken GmbH (Berlin, Germany)
      
         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 figurative mark Healios – Application for registration No 14 267 041
      
         Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings
      
         Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 June 2019 in Case R 341/2018-5
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the contested decision in so far as the appeal was allowed and the contested application was rejected;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order EUIPO to pay the costs.
               
            
         Pleas in law
      
      
                  —
               
               
                  Sufficient proofs of genuine use has not been provided, especially for ‘medical and bacteriology services’;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  There is no or low similarity of the goods and services, especially when comparing medical and bacteriology services in class 5;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  The graphic element and the perception of the relevant public was not sufficiently assessed.