Case T-387/03: Action brought on 25 November 2003 by Proteome, Inc against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Date: 2004-01-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), archives, database, trade-mark law

C 21/44

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.1.2004

that

the applicant

in calculating the
submits
Finally,
countervailing duty, the defendant infringed Articles 5 and 7
of Regulation 2026/97, the Guidelines on the calculation of
the amount of the subsidy in countervailing duty proceedings,
Articles 14 and 19 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures, and committed a manifest error of
assessment.

(1) OJ L 212 of 22 August 2003, p. 1.
(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 2026/97 of 6 October 1997 on
protection against subsidized imports from countries not mem-
bers of the European Community (OJ L 288, p. 1).
(3) See recital 48 and following of the contested decision.

Action brought on 17 November 2003 by Reti Televisive
Italiane — RTI against the Office for Harmonisation in
the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-384/03)

(2004/C 21/88)

(Language of the case: Italian)

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant
tration of
munity trade mark:

for
regis-
the Com-

Europortal Italia SpA, succeeded
by the applicant.

Community trade mark Word mark ‘Jumpy’ — regis-
tration application No 1.332.006,
sought:
registration sought in respect of a
number of goods in Classes 9 and
16.

Proprietor of mark or Microarea SpA.
sign cited in the oppo-
sition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in
opposition:

Italian word mark ‘Jump’
goods in Classes 9 and 16.

for

Decision of the Oppo-
sition Division:

Opposition upheld and appli-
cation rejected.

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Appeal dismissed.

Pleas in law:

Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b)
of Regulation No 40/94 (‘likeli-
hood of confusion’).

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
17 November 2003 by Reti Televisive Italiane — RTI, rep-
resented by Giorgio Floridia and Raffaella Floridia, lawyers.

Microarea SpA was also a party to the proceedings before the
Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Action brought on 25 November 2003 by Proteome, Inc
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-387/03)

(2004/C 21/89)

— annul the decision of 11 September 2003 of the First

Board of Appeal; or

(Language of the case: English)

— in the alternative, interpret the decision of the Opposition
Division No 2637/2002 of 30 August 2002 on Oppo-
sition No B321994 to the effect that it does not preclude
the valid registration of
to
distinguish it from the similarly-named Internet portal;

the trade mark ‘Jumpy’

— make an order pursuant to Article 87(2) of the Rules of
Procedure requiring the defendant, as the unsuccessful
party, to pay the costs.

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
25 November 2003 by Proteome, Inc., Beverley, Massachu-
setts, USA, represented by Dr Michael Edenborough, Barrister,
Mr Cerryg Jones, Ms Alexandra Brodie and Ms Carina Loweth
Solicitors.

24.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 21/45

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trademarks and Designs) No $ 0707/2002-4;

— Annul the decision of the Examination Division dated the

21st June 2002

— Remit Community trade mark application No 1 544 766
to the Office so as to allow the said application to proceed
to advertisement

— order the Office to pay the applicant’s costs incurred by
the applicant in connection with this appeal and the
appeal before the Board of Appeal and the prosecution
before the Examination Division.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

Proteome, Inc.

Community trade mark Word mark ‘BIOKNOWLEDGE’
for certain goods and services
sought:
in Classes 9 (databases etc.), 16
(printed material etc concerning
repositories of information relat-
ing to organisms) and 42 (infor-
mation and computer
services
etc.) (application No 1544766).

Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
24 November 2003 by Dainichiseika Colour & Chemicals Mfg.
Co. Ltd., Tokyo (Japan), represented by J. Hofmann, lawyer.
Pelikan Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG was also a party
to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of

18 September 2003 (Case R 191/2002-2);

— reject the opposition in its entirety;

— hold that the sign sought in Community trade mark
application No 1 005 826 may be registered as a
Community trade mark in respect of all the goods in
Classes 1, 2 and 17 claimed in that application of
25 November 1998;

— order the opponent to pay all the costs incurred by the
applicant in the opposition and appeal proceedings;

— order the opponent to pay the costs of the present

proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Decision of the Examin-
ation Division:

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Pleas in law:

Registration refused.

Appeal rejected.

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

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

Community trade mark
sought:

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

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

Proprietor of mark or
sign cited in the oppo-
sition proceedings:

The applicant.

in
Figurative mark for goods
Classes 1 (chemicals etc.), 2 (dye-
stuffs etc.) and 17 (plastics etc.) —
Application No 1 005 826.

Pelikan Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH
& Co. KG.

Action brought on 24 November 2003 by Dainichiseika
Colour & Chemicals Mfg. Co. Ltd. against the Office for
Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
Designs)

(Case T-389/03)

(2004/C 21/90)

(Language of the case to be determined pursuant to Article 131(2)
of the Rules of Procedure language in which the application was
submitted: German)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the

Mark or sign cited in
opposition:

Community and national
mark ‘Pelikan’.

trade

Decision of the Oppo-
sition Division:

Refusal of the application.

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Dismissal
appeal.

of

the

applicant’s

Pleas in law:

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of
Regulation No 40/94 (1).

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

Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).