Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document C2005/217/112

Case T-264/05: Action brought on 18 July 2005 by The Procter & Gamble Company against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

OB C 217, 3.9.2005, p. 54–55 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)

3.9.2005   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/54

Action brought on 18 July 2005 by The Procter & Gamble Company against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-264/05)

(2005/C 217/112)

Language of the case: English

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 18 July 2005 by The Procter & Gamble Company, established in Cincinnati, Ohio (USA), represented by G. Kuipers, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the OHIM of 4 May 2005 (Case R 849/2004-1) in so far as it finds that the mark does not satisfy the conditions laid down in Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94;

—

order the OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Community trade mark concerned:

The three dimensional mark consisting of a square white tablet showing a green four petalled floral design for goods in class 3 (Washing and bleaching preparations and other substances for laundry use; preparations for the washing cleaning and care of dishes; soaps;...) — application No 1 684 059

Decision of the examiner:

Refusal of the application

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law:

Violation of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 40/94.
Top