ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Third Chamber)

7 February 2013 (1)

(Community trade mark – Opposition – Withdrawal of the opposition – No need to adjudicate)

In Case T-407/12,

Ubee Interactive Corp., established in Jhubei City (Taiwan), represented by M. Nentwig, lawyer,

applicant,

v

Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), represented by I. Harrington, acting as Agent,

defendant,

the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM being

Augere Holdings (Netherlands) BV, established in Amsterdam (The Netherlands),

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 12 July 2012 (Case R 1849/2011-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Augere Holdings (Netherlands) BV and Ubee Interactive Corp.,

THE GENERAL COURT (Third Chamber),

composed of O. Czúcz, President, I. Labucka (Rapporteur), D. Gratsias, Judges,

Registrar: E. Coulon,

makes the following

Order

1        By letter lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 26 November 2012, the defendant informed the Court of an agreement between the applicant and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal and that, pursuant to that agreement, the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal has withdrawn its opposition to the application for registration of the contested mark. The defendant stated also that, in its view, there was no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action. The defendant requests the Court not to order it to bear the costs.

2        By letter lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 29 November 2012, the applicant informed the Court that, the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal had withdrawn its opposition to the application for registration of the contested mark. It asked the Court to declare the action devoid of purpose and not to render a decision on costs.

3        By letter lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 10 December 2012, the applicant, in its observations on the defendant’s application for a decision that there is no need to adjudicate, confirmed the existence of an amicable settlement between itself and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal and that, according to this settlement, each party shall bear its own costs.

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 for registration, 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 and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal must be ordered to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the defendant.

On those grounds,

THE GENERAL COURT (Third Chamber)

hereby orders:

1.      There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

2.      The applicant and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of those incurred by the defendant.

Luxembourg, 7 February 2013 .

E. Coulon

        O. Czúcz

Registrar

       President