ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Sixth Chamber)
9 September 2009 (1)
(Community trade mark – Opposition – Withdrawal of the opposition – No need to adjudicate)
In Case T-256/08,
Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company, established in Chicago (United States), represented by M. Kinkeldey, S Schäffler and A. Bognár, lawyers,
applicant,
v
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), represented by W. Verburg, acting as Agent,
defendant,
the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court of First Instance, being
Mejerigaarden Holding A/S, established in Thisted (Denmark), represented by A. Ellermann Holmbom, lawyer,
ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 April 2008 (Case R 845/2006-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Mejerigaarden Holding A/S and Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company,
THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (Sixth Chamber),
composed of A.W. H. Meij, President, V. Vadapalas (Rapporteur) and
L. Truchot, Judges,
Registrar: E. Coulon,
makes the present
Order
1 By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court of First Instance on 13 July 2009, the applicant informed the Court of an agreement reached with the intervener and that, pursuant to that agreement, the intervener was withdrawing its opposition to the application for registration of the contested mark. It also informed the Court that, under that agreement, each party was to bear its own costs.
2 By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court on 20 July 2009, the defendant informed the Court that it has no objections to the case being declared devoid of purpose. The defendant requested that the applicant be ordered to pay the costs.
3 Pursuant to Article 113 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, it suffices in the present case to hold that, in the light of the withdrawal of the opposition for registration, the present action has become devoid of purpose. There is therefore no longer any need to rule on the action (order in Case T‑10/01 Lichtwer Pharma v OHIM – Biofarma (Sedonium) [2003] ECR II‑2225, paragraphs 16 to 18).
4 Article 87(6) of the Rules of Procedure provides that, where a case does not proceed to judgment, the costs are in the discretion of the Court.
5 In the present case, the Court considers that the applicant should be ordered to bear its own costs as well as those incurred by the defendant. The intervener should be ordered to bear its own costs.
On those grounds,
THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Sixth Chamber)
hereby orders:
1. There is no need to rule on the action.
2. The applicant shall bear its own costs as well as those incurred by the defendant.
3. The intervener shall bear its own costs.
Luxembourg, 9 September 2009.