ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Eighth Chamber)
3 March 2010 (1)
(Community trade mark – Opposition – Withdrawal of the opposition – No need to adjudicate)
In Case T-105/07,
MarketTools, Inc., established in San Francisco (United States), represented by W. von der Osten-Sacken, A. González Hähnlein, O. Günzel and A. Wenninger, lawyers,
applicant,
v
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), represented initially by S. Laitinen, and subsequently by G. Schneider and D. Botis, acting as Agents,
defendant,
the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court, being
Optimus-Telecomunicações, SA, established in Maia (Portugal), represented by T. Colaço Dias and J. Conceição Pimenta, lawyers,
ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 January 2007 (Case R 253/2006-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Optimus-Telecomunicações, SA and MarketTools, Inc.,
THE GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION (Eighth Chamber),
composed of M. E. Martins Ribeiro, President, N. Wahl and A. Dittrich (Rapporteur), Judges,
Registrar: E. Coulon,
makes the present
Order
1 By letter lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 22 January 2010, the applicant informed the Court that the intervener had withdrawn its opposition to the application for registration of the contested trade mark and stated that, in its view, there was no longer any need to rule on the present action. It did not seek an order as to costs.
2 By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court on 27 January 2010, the defendant gave its agreement to the request for an order that there was no need to adjudicate. The defendant requests that the applicant be ordered to bear the costs.
3 Pursuant to Article 113 of the Rules of Procedure, 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 it (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 and those incurred by the defendant and that the intervener should be ordered to bear its own costs.
On those grounds,
THE GENERAL COURT (Eighth Chamber)
hereby orders:
1. There is no need to rule on the action.
2. The applicant shall bear its own costs and those incurred by the defendant.
3.
4. The intervener shall bear its own costs.
Luxembourg, 3 March 2010.
E. Coulon | | M. E. Martins Ribeiro |