EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2005/217/111
Case T-263/05: Action brought on 18 July 2005 by The Procter & Gamble Company against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Case T-263/05: Action brought on 18 July 2005 by The Procter & Gamble Company against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Case T-263/05: Action brought on 18 July 2005 by The Procter & Gamble Company against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
JO C 217, 3.9.2005, p. 54–54
(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-263/05)
(2005/C 217/111)
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 3 May 2005 (Case R 845/2004-1) 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 lilac 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 1 683 713 |
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. |