ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Seventh Chamber)
15 November 2011 (1)
(Community trade mark – Opposition – Withdrawal of the opposition – No need to adjudicate)
In Case T-263/08,
Becker Flugfunkwerk GmbH, established in Rheinmünster (Germany), represented by O. Griebenow, 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, being
Harman Becker Automotive Systems GmbH, established in Karlsbad (Germany),
ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 April 2008 (Case R 398/2007-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Harman Becker Automotive Systems GmbH and Becker Flugfunkwerk GmbH,
THE GENERAL COURT (Seventh Chamber),
composed of A. Dittrich, President (Rapporteur), I. Wiszniewska-Białecka, M. Prek, Judges,
Registrar: E. Coulon,
makes the following
Order
1 By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court on 25 September 2011, the applicant informed the Court that the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal withdrew 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 adjudicate on the present action. It did not seek an order as to costs.
2 By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court on 14 October 2011, the defendant signified its agreement to the request for an order that there was no need to adjudicate. The defendant requests the Court to order the applicant to bear the costs.
3 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 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 must be ordered to bear its own costs and those incurred by the defendant.
On those grounds,
THE GENERAL COURT (Seventh Chamber)
hereby orders:
1. There is no need to adjudicate on the action.
2. The applicant shall bear its own costs and those incurred by the defendant.
Luxembourg, 15 November 2011.