EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010TN0352
Case T-352/10: Action brought on 26 August 2010 — Milux v OHMI (RECTALCONTROL)
Case T-352/10: Action brought on 26 August 2010 — Milux v OHMI (RECTALCONTROL)
Case T-352/10: Action brought on 26 August 2010 — Milux v OHMI (RECTALCONTROL)
SL C 288, 23.10.2010, p. 54–55
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
23.10.2010 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 288/54 |
Action brought on 26 August 2010 — Milux v OHMI (RECTALCONTROL)
(Case T-352/10)
()
(2010/C 288/101)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Milux Holding SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: J. Bojs, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Form of order sought
— |
Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 28 July 2010 in case R 1443/2009-4; |
— |
Order the defendant to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘RECTALCONTROL’ for goods and services in classes 9, 10 and 44
Decision of the examiner: Refused the application for a Community trade mark
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
Pleas in law: Infringement of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal misapplied the principle of non-discrimination and equal treatment to the facts in this case; in the alternative, infringement of Articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(c) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal erred in its conclusion that the trade mark applied for does not possess sufficient inherent distinctiveness.