Case T-8/04: Action brought on 9 January 2004 by Muswellbrook Limited against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Date: 2004-03-06
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), clothing industry, education, footwear industry, leisure, trade-mark law

C 59/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.3.2004

Grounds of the appeal:

Wrong application of Article
8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/
94 (likelihood of confusion), fail-
ure to state reasons and misuse
of powers by manifest error of
assessment
inconsistency
and
with the Examiner’s decision of
23 November 1999 regarding
partial rejection of the registration
of the mark concerned.

Action brought on 9 January 2004 by Muswellbrook
Limited against the Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-8/04)

(2004/C 59/57)

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicants for the Com-
munity trade mark:

Friedrich Grimm and Engelbert
Rolli

Community trade mark
sought:

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

Mark or sign cited in
opposition:

Community trade mark appli-
cation No 847640 for word mark
SNIKE in relation to certain goods
in classes 12, 25 and 41 (Vehicles,
clothing, footwear, headgear, edu-
cation, entertainment,...)

The applicant, Muswellbrook Ltd.

certain goods

The national figurative mark No
in
88222 for
class 25 (Stockings, socks, shirts,
gloves, coats, footwear, sporting
footwear, ...)

Decision of the Oppo-
sition Division:

Rejection of the opposition

(Language of the case to be determined pursuant to article 131(2) of
the Rules of Procedure — language in which the case was submitted:
English)

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Dismissal of the appeal

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
9 January 2004 by Muswellbrook Limited, Dublin, Ireland,
represented by Ms P. Koch Moreno, lawyer. Friedrich Grimm
and Engelbert Rolli were also party to the proceedings before
the Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare that the decision which was issued on 5 November
2003 by the First Board of Appeal of OHIM, which
dismissed the plaintiff’s appeal against the resolution of
29 April 2002 in opposition procedure No B 1181/
2002, which dismissed the opposition that was lodged
against community trade mark application No 847640
for the registration of the word SNIKE in relation to all
the products of class 25 covered by the application, does
not comply with the EC Regulations on Community
Trade Marks, No 40/94, and that the said decision be set
aside;

— declare that there is a risk of confusion between the
community trade mark application with No 847640 for
the word SNIKE in class 25 and Spanish trade mark
No 88222, consisting of the word NIKE with device,
which protects identical products that also fall under
class 25;

— order the respondent and, if applicable, the intervening

party to pay the costs of these proceedings.

Pleas in law:

Violation of Article 8 (1) (b) of
Council Regulation (EC) No 40/
941 (1)

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

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

Action brought on5 January 2004 by Carlos Leite Mateus
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-10/04)

(2004/C 59/58)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 5 January 2004 by Carlos Leite
Mateus, residing in Zaventem (Belgium), represented by Sébas-
tien Orlandi, Albert Coolen,
Jean-Noël Louis and Étienne
Marchal, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.