Order of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 23 August 2023 – Nienaber v EUIPO (BoneKare)
(Case T‑610/22) (1)
(EU trade mark – Application for EU word mark BoneKare – Absolute grounds for refusal – Descriptive character – No distinctive character – Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
1.      EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks consisting exclusively of signs or indications which may serve to designate the characteristics of a product or service – Concept
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))
(see paragraphs 16-20, 26)
2.      EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks consisting exclusively of signs or indications which may serve to designate the characteristics of a product or service – Word mark BoneKare
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))
(see paragraphs 27-30, 35, 39, 40)
3.      EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice – Principle of legality – Need for a stringent and full examination in each individual case
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001)
(see paragraph 41)
4.      EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Descriptive character of a sign – Circumstance necessarily implying absence of distinctive character of the sign
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(b) and (c))
(see paragraph 49)
Operative part
1.
The action is dismissed.
2.
Ms Jannah Nienaber and Mr Andreas Nienaber shall bear their own costs.
3.
The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs.
1 OJ 441, 21.11.2022.