|
8.3.2008 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 64/61 |
Action brought on 8 January 2008 — Evets v OHIM (DANELECTRO)
(Case T-20/08)
(2008/C 64/98)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Evets Corporation (Irvine, United States) (represented by: S. Ryan, Solicitor)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Form of order sought
|
— |
That the decision R 603/2007 — 4 of the Fourth Board of Appeal of 5 November 2007 be set aside; |
|
— |
that an order be substituted that the application for restitutio in integrum was brought within the time-limits as prescribed by Article 78(2); |
|
— |
that the matter be referred back to the Fourth Board of Appeal for them to deal with the substantive issue as to whether all due care was taken to renew the trade mark concerned; |
|
— |
that the costs be borne by the defendant. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Community trade mark concerned: The Community word mark ‘DANELECTRO’ for goods and services in classes 9 and 15 — application No 117 937
Decision of the Administration of Trade Marks and Legal Division: Refused the request for restitutio in integrum and declared the trade mark as deemed to have been cancelled
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal and declared the restitutio in integrum request as deemed not to have been filed
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 78(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94.
The applicant claims that the question of compliance with the two month time-limit set by the abovementioned provision for the filing of the application for renewal of trade mark registrations and payment of the renewal fee was not part of the appeal. Should the Court decide that the Board was entitled to examine this issue, the applicant alternatively argues that the time-limit was calculated in an incorrect fashion.