Case T-184/03: Action brought on 21 May 2003 by Metrovacesa SA against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Date: 2003-08-02
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), property development, real estate business, trade-mark law

C 184/44

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.8.2003

— make the appropriate ruling as to costs and order the

Parliament to pay those costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants in this case seek the annulment of the Parlia-
ment's decision changing the method of calculating annual
travel expenses to Greece.

The pleas in law and main arguments put
forward by the
applicants in support of their application are similar to those
of the applicants in Cases T-221/02 (1) and T-44/03 (2).

(1) OJ C 247, 12.10.02, p. 17.
(2) OJ C 101, 26.04.03, p. 40.

Action brought on 26 May 2003 by Applied Molecular
Evolution, Inc. against the Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-183/03)

(2003/C 184/97)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
26 May 2003 by Applied Molecular Evolution, Inc., San Diego,
USA, represented by Mr A. Deutsch, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:
— Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade-
marks and Designs)
case R 108/2002-2 of
13 March 2003.

in the

— Order the defendant to register the mark No 001586510

‘APPLIED MOLECULAR EVOLUTION’

— Order the costs of the proceedings to be borne by the

defendant

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant
trade mark:

for Community

Applied Molecular
Inc

Evolution,

Community
sought:

trade mark

Word mark ‘APPLIED MOLECU-
LAR EVOLUTION’
for certain
services in Class 42 (application
No 001586510)

Examiner's decision:

Application refused

Decision of
Appeal:

Pleas in law:

the Board of

Appeal dismissed

Misapplication of Article 7(1)
(b) and (c), of Regulation 40/
94 (1).

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the

Community trade mark (OJ 11, p. 1).

Action brought on 21 May 2003 by Metrovacesa SA
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
against
Market (Trade marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-184/03)

(2003/C 184/98)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
21 May 2003 by Metrovacesa SA, (Madrid), represented by José
Antonio Calderón Chavero, lawyer at the Madrid Bar.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM

of 10 March 2003 in Case R-183/2002;

— dismiss in its entirety opposition procedure no B262.271;

— uphold the claims of the appellant and allow the relevant
Opposition Division at OHIM to register the trade mark
in question; and

— order OHIM and the other parties to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant
trade mark:

for Community

GESINAR S.L. (Assignee: the ap-
plicant)

Community
sought:

trade mark

Figurative mark ‘Gesinar’ — Ap-
plication no 1 202 027 for
goods in Classes 35, 36 and
41 (business management assis-
tance, administration, brokerage,
leasing,
appraisal
evaluation,
and development of all kinds
of real estate;
tokens
of value, educational and enter-
tainment services)

issue of

Proprietor of mark or sign
cited in the opposition pro-
ceedings:

GESTIONES
VAS Y SERVICIOS
LIARIOS MAR S.L.

ADMINISTRATI-
INMOBI-

2.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 184/45

Mark or sign cited in oppo-
sition:

Figurative mark
(mark
with
no 1975912,
Class 36)

for

‘GESINMAR’
priority
in

goods

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant
trade mark:

for Community

The Applicant

Decision of the Opposition
Division:

Upholding of the opposition for
all services in Class 36

Community
sought:

trade mark

The trade name ‘ENZO FUSCO’
— Application for
registration
No 726735, requested for pro-
ducts in Classes 3, 9, 18, 24
and 25 (products which are tra-
ditionally the subject of
trade
mark registration by so-called
creators of taste and fashion)

Decision of
Appeal:

Pleas in law:

the Board of

Dismissal of the appeal

Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b)
of Regulation (EC) No 40/94
(likelihood of confusion)

Action brought on 27 May 2003 by Vincenzo Fusco
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
against
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-185/03)

(2003/C 184/99)

(Language of the case: Italian)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
27 May 2003 by Vincenzo Fusco, represented by B. Saguatti,
lawyers.

The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
was Antonio Fusco International S.A.

The applicant claims:

— as a principal claim,

that

the
contested decisions of the Board of Appeal holding that
the marks Antonio Fusco and Enzo Fusco were liable to
be confused with each other;

the Court should annul

Proprietor of mark or sign
cited in the opposition pro-
ceedings:

Antonio
Fusco
S.A., Luxembourg

International

Mark or sign cited in op-
position:

‘ANTONIO
Community mark
FUSCO’
(Registration
No 654059) for products sub-
stantially
those
to
identical
claimed by the Applicant

Decision of the Opposition
Division:

Opposition upheld and applica-
tion for registration dismissed

Decision of
Appeal:

Pleas in law:

the Board of

Dismissal of the appeal.

Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b)
of Regulation (EC) No 40/94
(Risk of confusion).

Action brought on 27 May 2003 by Joëlle Hivonnet
against Council of the European Union

(Case T-188/03)

(2003/C 184/100)

(Language of the case: French)

— in the alternative, should the Court hold that the marks
Antonio Fusco and Enzo Fusco are liable to confusion,
that the Court should specify the precise territorial scope
of the decision;

— as a principal claim, a declaration that, although the
opposition is based on an earlier Community trade
mark, the transformation procedure is not precluded save
by reference to the territory in respect of which the
existence of a risk of confusion may be recognised;
— that the opponent should be ordered to pay the costs, or,
in the alternative, given the delicacy and complexity of
the questions under consideration, that a composition of
costs should be established.

the Council of

An action against
the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 27 May 2003 by Joëlle Hivonnet, domiciled
in New York (United States), represented by Georges Vander-
sanden and Laure Levi, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:
— annul the decision of the appointing authority of 23 July
2002 rejecting the applicant's request for the grant of an
education allowance for her daughter Eponine for the
school years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001,
and only
granting an education allowance for
the school year
2001-2002 on an exceptional basis on the ground of
educational continuity;