Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 17 January 2013 — Abbott Laboratories v OHIM

(Case C-21/12 P)

‛Appeal — Community trade mark — Word mark ‘RESTORE’ — Refusal to register — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Lack of distinctiveness — Right to be heard — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Articles 7 (1)(b) and (c) and 75, second sentence — Equal treatment’

1. Appeals — Grounds — Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 53)

2. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Assessment in relation to the products and services in respect of which registration is sought (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see para. 69)

3. Appeals — Grounds — Mere repetition of the pleas and arguments put forward before the General Court — Error of law relied on not identified — Not admissible (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 112(1)(c)) (see paras 84, 85)

4. Appeals — Grounds — Challenge of the decision contested before the General Court and not of the judgment of the latter — Not admissible (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 112(1)(c)) (see para. 86)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 15 November 2011 in Case T-363/10 Abbott Laboratories v OHIM, by which the General Court dismissed the appellant’s action against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 June 2010 (Case R 1560/2009-1), concerning an application for registration of the word mark RESTORE as a Community trade mark — Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and of Article 75 of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) — Distinctiveness of the word mark RESTORE.

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Abbott Laboratories is ordered to pay the costs.

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 17 January 2013 — Abbott Laboratories v OHIM

(Case C-21/12 P)

‛Appeal — Community trade mark — Word mark ‘RESTORE’ — Refusal to register — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Lack of distinctiveness — Right to be heard — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Articles 7 (1)(b) and (c) and 75, second sentence — Equal treatment’

1. Appeals — Grounds — Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 53)

2. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Assessment in relation to the products and services in respect of which registration is sought (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see para. 69)

3. Appeals — Grounds — Mere repetition of the pleas and arguments put forward before the General Court — Error of law relied on not identified — Not admissible (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 112(1)(c)) (see paras 84, 85)

4. Appeals — Grounds — Challenge of the decision contested before the General Court and not of the judgment of the latter — Not admissible (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 112(1)(c)) (see para. 86)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 15 November 2011 in Case T-363/10 Abbott Laboratories v OHIM, by which the General Court dismissed the appellant’s action against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 June 2010 (Case R 1560/2009-1), concerning an application for registration of the word mark RESTORE as a Community trade mark — Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and of Article 75 of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) — Distinctiveness of the word mark RESTORE.

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.