Action brought on 6 July 2012 - Torrefacção Camelo v OHIM - Pato Hermanos (Decoration of packaging for coffee)

(Case T-302/12)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Torrefacção Camelo Lda (Campo Maior, Portugal) (represented by: J. Massaguer Fuentes, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Lorenzo Pato Hermanos, SA (Madrid, Spain)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should declare, in view of the lodging of this pleading and the documents attached to it, that the direct action against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 17 April 2012 in Case R 2378/2010-3 has been lodged within the prescribed period and in the correct form and, following the appropriate procedural steps, deliver judgment upholding the present action, thereby annulling the contested decision and upholding the decision of the Cancellation Division of 26 November 2010 which declared invalid Community design No 0 0070 6940-0001, and expressly order Lorenzo Patos Hermanos, SA to pay the costs if it opposes the present action.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: design with a red background, coffee beans with a white outline scattered at random over the red background, and two upper and lower horizontal yellow borders placed over the red background, for goods in Class 99-00 of the Locarno Classification - Community design No 0 0070 6940-0001

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Lorenzo Pato Hermanos, SA

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: the applicant

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: infringement of Articles 4 to 9 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Decision of the Cancellation Division: application for a declaration of invalidity granted

Decision of the Board of Appeal: annulment of the decision of the Cancellation Division and rejection of the application for a declaration of invalidity

Pleas in law: infringement of Articles 5 and 6 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

____________