Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document C2006/310/45

    Case T-294/06: Action brought on 20 October 2006 — Nordmilch v OHIM (Vitality)

    ĠU C 310, 16.12.2006, p. 23–24 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    16.12.2006   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 310/23


    Action brought on 20 October 2006 — Nordmilch v OHIM (Vitality)

    (Case T-294/06)

    (2006/C 310/45)

    Language of the case: German

    Parties

    Applicant: Nordmilch eG (Zeven, Germany) (represented by R. Schneider, 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 OHIM of 9 August 2006 in Case R 746/2004-4 in so far as it dismisses the applicant's appeal

    order OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the applicant's costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘Vitality’ for goods and services in Classes 29, 30, 32, 33 and 43 (Application No 2 835 684).

    Decision of the Examiner: Partial refusal to register

    Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

    Pleas in law: The ground for denying the mark protection which is given in Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1) does not preclude registration as the mark for which registration is sought makes it immediately possible for the relevant public to recognise the origin of the goods protected by that mark and to distinguish them from the goods of other enterprises.


    (1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1)


    Top