This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2006/074/36
Case T-398/04: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 17 January 2006 — Henkel v OHIM (Community trade mark — Figurative mark — Red and white rectangular tablet with an oval blue centre — Absolute ground for refusal — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Absence of distinctive character)
Case T-398/04: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 17 January 2006 — Henkel v OHIM (Community trade mark — Figurative mark — Red and white rectangular tablet with an oval blue centre — Absolute ground for refusal — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Absence of distinctive character)
Case T-398/04: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 17 January 2006 — Henkel v OHIM (Community trade mark — Figurative mark — Red and white rectangular tablet with an oval blue centre — Absolute ground for refusal — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Absence of distinctive character)
OJ C 74, 25.3.2006, p. 18–18
(ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)
25.3.2006 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 74/18 |
Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 17 January 2006 — Henkel v OHIM
(Case T-398/04) (1)
(Community trade mark - Figurative mark - Red and white rectangular tablet with an oval blue centre - Absolute ground for refusal - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Absence of distinctive character)
(2006/C 74/36)
Language of the case: German
Parties:
Applicant: Henkel KGaA (Dusseldorf, Germany) (represented by: C. Osterrieth, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: initially D. Schennen, subsequently D. Schennen and G. Schneider, Agents)
Action
brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 August 2004 (Case R 771/1999-2), in relation to the registration of a figurative mark consisting of the representation of a rectangular tablet
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1. |
Dismisses the application. |
2. |
Orders the applicant to pay the costs. |