Case T-256/04: Action brought on 28 June 2004 by Mundipharma AG against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Date: 2004-08-28
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), pharmaceutical product, respiratory disease, trade-mark law

28.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/35

Action brought on 18 June 2004 by Caviar Anzali against
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Action brought on 28 June 2004 by Mundipharma AG
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
against
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-252/04)

(2004/C 217/62)

(Language of the case: French)

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 18
June 2004 by Caviar Anzali, established in Colombes (France),
represented by Jean-François Jésus, lawyer.

Novomarket S.A. was also a party to the proceedings before
the Second Board of Appeal.

(Case T-256/04)

(2004/C 217/63)

(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
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 28
June 2004 by Mundipharma AG, Basel
(Switzerland), repre-
sented by F. Nielsen, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Altana Pharma AG, Konstanz (Germany), was also a party to
the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

— annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 19 April
2004 (Case R 479/2003-2, Caviar Anzali v Novomarket);

— order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market

to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

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 of 19 April
2004 (Case R 1004/2002-2);

— order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market

to pay the costs.

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

Novomarket S.A.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Community trade mark
sought:

Figurative mark 'Asetra' for, inter
alia, goods in Classes 29 and 31
(Application No 2187805)

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

ALTANA Pharma AG

Proprietor of mark or
sign cited in the opposi-
tion proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in
opposition.

Caviar Anzali S.A.

Community trade mark
sought:

Word mark 'RESPICUR' for goods
in Class 5 (Respiratory therapeu-
tics) – Application No 949156

National and international figura-
tive mark 'Astara'
for goods in
Class 29

Proprietor of mark or
sign cited in the opposi-
tion proceedings:

The applicant

Decision of the Opposi-
tion Division:

Rejection of the opposition

Mark or sign cited in
opposition.

Decision of
of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

the Board

Rejection of the appeal

that

claims

applicant

The
the
nature of the system used before
the Board of Appeal requires that
the application be
re-examined
and that transmission of the trans-
lation after expiry of the time-limit
set by the Opposition Division
cannot
the
opposition.

lead to rejection of

German word mark 'RESPICORT'
for goods in Class 5 (pharmaceu-
tical preparations; preparations for
medical purposes; plasters)

Rejection of the opposition

Annulment of the decision of the
Opposition Division and rejection
of the opposition

Decision of the Opposi-
tion Division:

Decision of
of Appeal:

the Board

Pleas in law:

Breach of Article 8(1)(b) of Regu-
lation (EC) No 40/94.