Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62014TJ0470

    Hewlett Packard Development Company v OHIM (ELITEPAD)

    Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 22 October 2015 —

    Hewlett Packard Development Company v OHIM (ELITEPAD)

    (Case T‑470/14)

    ‛Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark ELITEPAD — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009’

    1. 

    Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service — Aim — Need to preserve availability (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see paras 14, 15, 32)

    2. 

    Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service — Criteria (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see paras 16-18)

    3. 

    Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service — Word mark ELITEPAD (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see paras 24-29)

    4. 

    Community trade mark — Decisions of the Office — Principle of equal treatment — Principle of sound administration — OHIM’s previous decision-making practice — Principle of legality — Need for a strict and complete examination in each particular case (see paras 33, 34)

    Re:

    ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 March 2014 (Case R 884/2013-2), concerning an application for registration of the word sign ELITEPAD as a Community trade mark.

    Operative part

    The Court:

    1. 

    Dismisses the action;

    2. 

    Orders Hewlett Packard Development Company LP to pay the costs.
    Top