CELEX: 62019TN0643
Language: en
Date: 2019-09-26 00:00:00
Title: Case T-643/19: Action brought on 26 September 2019 – Dermavita v EUIPO – Allergan Holdings France (JUVEDERM ULTRA)

11.11.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 383/76
            
         
      Action brought on 26 September 2019 – Dermavita v EUIPO – Allergan Holdings France (JUVEDERM ULTRA)
      (Case T-643/19)
      (2019/C 383/84)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: Dermavita Co. Ltd (Beirut, Lebanon) (represented by: D. Todorov, lawyer)
      
         Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
      
         Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Allergan Holdings France (Courbevoie, France)
      
         Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
      
      
         Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
      
         Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark JUVEDERM ULTRA – European Union trade mark No 6 295 638
      
         Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings
      
         Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 July 2019 in Joined Cases R 1655/2018-4 and R 1723/2018-4
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  partially annul the contested decision concerning the dismissal of appeal R 1723/2018-4 and the decision of non-revocation of EUTM No 6 295 638 for the goods in class 5 and;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order EUIPO and the other party to bear their own costs and pay those of the applicant for annulment at every stage of the action for revocation and appeal proceedings, including the cost of the proceedings before EUIPO and the Court.
               
            
         Pleas in law
      
      
                  —
               
               
                  Erroneous interpretation of the relevant law concerning the assessment of the nature of the goods the trademark has been used for;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  Misinterpretation of some of the evidence in the proceedings concerning the use of the trademark by third parties with the consent of the EUTM proprietor;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  Lack of sufficient proofs of the consent of the EUTM proprietor under the meaning of Article 18(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.