CELEX: 62014TN0198
Language: en
Date: 2014-03-24 00:00:00
Title: Case T-198/14: Action brought on 24 March 2014  — 100% Capri Italia v OHIM — Cantoni ITC (100% Capri)

26.5.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 159/35
            
         Action brought on 24 March 2014 — 100% Capri Italia v OHIM — Cantoni ITC (100% Capri)
   (Case T-198/14)
   2014/C 159/48
   Language in which the application was lodged: Italian
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: 100% Capri Italia Srl (Capri, Italy) (represented by: A. Perani, G. Ghisletti and F. Braga, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Cantoni ITC SpA (Milan, Italy)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               declare an infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation n. 207/2009; and, accordingly,
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 10 January 2014 in Case R 2122/2012-2;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order OHIM to pay the costs of the present proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant
   
      Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark with the word elements ‘100% Capri’ for goods in Classes 3, 18 and 25
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Cantoni ITC SpA
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: Figurative mark containing the word element ‘CAPRI’ and national word mark ‘CAPRI’ for goods in Classes 3, 18 and 25
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal in part
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009