Official Journal of the European Union

C 141/48

Action brought on 30 March 2009 — B Antonio Basile 1952 and I Marchi Italiani v OHIM

(Case T-134/09)

2009/C 141/100

Language in which the application was lodged: Italian


Applicants: B Antonio Basile 1952 (Giugliano, Italy) and I Marchi Italiani (Naples, Italy) (represented by: G. Militerni, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party/parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Osra SA (Rovereta, Italy)

Form of order sought

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal dated 09.01.2009, notified to the applicants in the present case on 30.01.2009 in proceedings R 1436/2007-2, between Antonio Basile, operating as a sole proprietorship ‘B Antonio Basile 1952’ and Osra S.A., which upheld the decision of the Cancellation Division, which allowed the application for revocation and declaration of invalidity of the mark ‘B Antonio Basile 1952’, following the action brought by Osra S.A.;

Declare the registration of the mark ‘B Antonio Basile 1952’ to be valid and effective as from the date of filing of the application and/or registration of that mark;

Order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Figurative mark containing the wording ‘B Antonio Basile 1952’ (Community trade mark application No 1 462 555), for goods in Classes 14, 18 and 25

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicants.

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: Osra S.A.

Trade mark right of applicant for the declaration: Word mark ‘BASILE’ (Italian registration No 287 030 and international registration No R 413 396 B) for goods in Class 25.

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Declared the trade mark in question to be partially invalid in relation to goods in Class 25.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal.

Pleas in law: The grounds put forward in the present action are the same as those in Case T-133/09.