ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Sixth Chamber)
14 June 2010 (1)
(Community trade mark – Opposition – Withdrawal of the opposition – No need to adjudicate)
In Case T-453/07,
Dylog Italia SpA, established in Turin (Italy), represented by A. Ruo, lawyer,
applicant,
v
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), represented by A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent,
defendant,
the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court, being
GSI Office Management GmbH, established in Planegg (Germany), represented by Ch. Thomas, A. Beschorner and B. Glaser, lawyers,
ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 September 2007 (Case R 982/2005-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Dylog Italia SpA and GSI Office Management GmbH,
THE GENERAL COURT (Sixth Chamber),
composed of A.W.H. Meij, President, V. Vadapalas, T. Tchipev, Judges,
Registrar: E. Coulon,
makes the following
Order
1 By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court on 23 April 2010, the intervener informed the Court of an agreement between itself and the applicant and that, pursuant to that agreement, it was withdrawing its opposition to the application for registration of the contested mark.
2 By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court on 4 May 2010, the defendant informed the Court that it raises no objections to the case being declared devoid of purpose (according to Article 113 of the Rules of Procedure). The defendant requests the Court to order the applicant to bear the costs.
3 The applicant did not lodge any observations on the application for the case to be declared devoid of purpose within the given time-limit.
4 Pursuant to Article 113 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court, it suffices in the present case to find that, in the light of the withdrawal of the opposition, the present action has become devoid of purpose. There is therefore no longer any need to adjudicate on the action (order in Case T‑10/01 Lichtwer Pharma v OHIM – Biofarma (Sedonium) [2003] ECR II‑2225, paragraphs 16 to 18).
5 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.
6 In the present case, the Court considers that the applicant having withdrawn its opposition must be ordered to bear the costs.
On those grounds,
THE GENERAL COURT (Sixth Chamber)
hereby orders:
1. There is no need to adjudicate on the action.
2. The applicant shall bear the costs.
Luxembourg, 14 June 2010.