Order of the Court of First Instance of 3 July 2003 in Case T-10/01: Lichtwer Pharma AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Community trade mark — Opposition — Opposition withdrawn — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2003-11-29
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), medicinal product, pharmaceutical industry, trade-mark law

29.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 289/23

L. Levi, avocats, against the Court of Justice of the European
Communities (Agent: M. Schauss) — application for annul-
ment of the decision of the appointing authority of 11 March
2002 rejecting the applicant’s candidature for the adminis-
trator’s post referred to in notice of vacancy CJ 62/01 — the
Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of V. Tiili,
President, P. Mengozzi and M. Vilaras, Judges; D. Christensen,
Administrator, Registrar, has given a judgment on 30 Septem-
ber 2003 in which it:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 305 of 7 December 2002.

ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST
INSTANCE

of 1 August 2003

in Case T-198/01 R Technische Glaswerke Ilmenau GmbH
v Commission of the European Communities

(Proceedings for interim measures — State aid — Obligation
to recover aid — Prima facie case — Urgency — Weighing
up of interests — Exceptional circumstances — Provisional
suspension)

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 3 July 2003

in Case T-10/01: Lichtwer Pharma AG v Office for
Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
Designs) (OHIM) (1)

(Community trade mark — Opposition — Opposition
withdrawn — No need to adjudicate)

(2003/C 289/49)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case T-10/01, Lichtwer Pharma AG, established in Berlin,
represented by H.P. Kunz-Hallstein and R. Kunz-Hallstein,
lawyers, v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents: O. Walbroeck and
G. Schneider), Biofarma, formerly Orsem SARL, established in
Neuilly-sur-Seine (France), represented by V. Gil Vega and
A. Ruiz López, lawyers: Appeal against the decision of the
Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in
the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 8 November
2000 (Case R 586/1999-2) relating to opposition proceedings
between Lichtwer Pharma AG and Biofarma, the Court of First
Instance (Second Chamber), composed of: N.J. Forwood,
President, J. Pirrung and A.W.H. Meij, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar,
has made an order on 3 July 2003, the operative part of which
is as follows:

1.

2.

There is no need to adjudicate.

The applicant and the intervener must be ordered to bear their
own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the defendant.

(1) OJ C 161 of 2.6.2001.

(2003/C 289/50)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case T-198/01 R: Technische Glaswerke Ilmenau GmbH,
established at Ilmenau, (Germany), represented by G. Schohe
and C. Arhold,
lawyers, with an address for service in
Luxembourg, against Commission of the European Communi-
ties (Agents: V. Di Bucci and V. Kreuschitz), supported by
Schott Glas, established at Mainz (Germany), represented by
U. Soltész, lawyer — application for extension of the suspen-
sion of the operation, ordered in this case by order of the
President of the Court of First Instance of 4 April 2002, of
Article 2 of Commission Decision 2002/185/EC of 12 June
2001 on State aid implemented by Germany for Technische
Glaswerke Ilmenau GmbH (OJ 2000 L 62, p. 30) — the
President of the Court of First Instance has made an order on
1 August 2003 in which he:

1.

Suspends the operation until 17 February 2004 of Article 2 of
Commission Decision 2002/185/EC of 12 June 2001 on
State aid C 44/2001 implemented by Germany for Technische
Glaswerke Ilmenau GmbH;

2. Makes that suspension subject to the following conditions: first,
that the four conditions laid down in the second point of the
operative part of the order made today in Case T-378/02 R
should be satisfied by the applicant, especially as regards the
dates fixed therein; second, that the applicant should before
31 December 2003 at the latest repay to the Bundesanstalt für
Vereinigungsbedingte Sonderaufgaben an additional sum of
EUR 256 000 and that it should lodge at the Registry of the
Court of First Instance and at the Commission, within one week
of making that payment, and by 7 January 2004 at the latest,
written proof of that payment; third, that it should lodge at the
Registry of the Court of First Instance and at the Commission,
by 6 February 2004 at the latest, a detailed report drawn up
by an accountant on its financial situation at 31 December
2003 and, in particular, the additional sum which it would be
able to pay by 30 June 2004 at the latest, if judgment in the
case in the main proceedings should not have been given by
that lastmentioned date.