This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2005/296/61
Case T-340/05: Action brought on 13 September 2005 — Adler Modemärkte/OHIM
Case T-340/05: Action brought on 13 September 2005 — Adler Modemärkte/OHIM
Case T-340/05: Action brought on 13 September 2005 — Adler Modemärkte/OHIM
OJ C 296, 26.11.2005, p. 28–28
(ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
26.11.2005 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 296/28 |
Action brought on 13 September 2005 — Adler Modemärkte/OHIM
(Case T-340/05)
(2005/C 296/61)
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant(s): Adler Modemärkte GmbH (Haibach, Germany) [represented by: R. Kaase, lawyer]
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party/parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: BVM S.p.A. (Bologna, Italy)
Form of order sought
|
— |
Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the OHIM of 23 May 2005 in Case R 434/2003-4 on the grounds that it does not comply with Art 8 (1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94; |
|
— |
Order the defendant to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant
Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘Eagle’ for goods in classes 3, 18 and 25 — application No 1 595 909
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: BVM S.p.A.
Mark or sign cited: The national and international figurative mark and word mark ‘Blue Eagle’ for goods in classes 3, 18 and 25
Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld for all the contested goods
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 40/94 as there is no likelihood of confusion between the conflicting trade marks. The overall impression of the two trade marks is substantially different and the component ‘eagle’ is not the dominating element of the opposition trade mark.