Case T-332/04: Action brought on 6 August 2004 by SEBIRAN, S.L. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Date: 2004-11-20
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), alcoholic beverage, non-alcoholic beverage, trade-mark law

C 284/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.11.2004

The applicant argues that during the examination, owing to the
it was nowhere near
difficulties arising from his handicap,
possible for him to read through all
the questions in the
allotted time and select the right answers. He argues that he
belonged to the 180 best candidates and would therefore have
been admitted to the next stage of the competition, if he had
been given the requested compensation for his incapacity. He
therefore seeks a declaration that he compensation he applied
for was wrongly denied to him.

Action brought on 6 August 2004 by SEBIRAN, S.L.
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
against
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-332/04)

(2004/C 284/41)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

Action brought on 11 August 2004 by Stephen Stork
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-331/04)

(2004/C 284/40)

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 6
August 2004 by SEBIRAN, S.L., represented by José Antonio
Calderón Chavero, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

(Language of the case: German)

of 15 June 2004 in Case R-550/2003-2;

— Annul the decision of the OHIM Second Board of Appeal

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 11 August 2004 by Stephen Stork,
Chaumont-Gistoux (Belgium), represented by Bernd Arians,
lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the Commission's decision of 5 May 2004 on the
applicant's complaint and the Commission's decision of 10
December 2003 classing the applicant in Grade A7;

— require the Commission to adopt a new decision on the
applicant's grade, including a full statement of reasons;

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The applicant contests the Commission's decision to class him
in Grade A7, Step 3. He alleges errors of assessment in the
application of Article 31(2) of the Staff Regulations.

The applicant submits that the contested decision fails to take
account of facts relating to the quality of the applicant's profes-
sional experience which are of fundamental relevance to classi-
fication and that there was a failure to recognise the relevance
of those facts in recruiting the applicant to his first post and to
take proper account of the defendant's recruitment needs.

Moreover, the applicant alleges a failure to exercise discretion,
infringement of the principles of protection of legitimate expec-
tations and of equal treatment, procedural errors and failure to
give a proper statement of reasons.

— Confirm decision 1472/2003 in opposition proceedings
B348708 dismissing the opposition brought by the oppo-
nent
in its entirety and allow the application for the
contested mark for all the classes claimed;

— Order OHIM and the other parties to pay the costs of these
proceedings in the event of the proceedings being defended
and those parties' claims being rejected.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

Community trade mark
sought:

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

Mark or sign cited in
opposition.

The applicant

Figurative mark ‘COTO D'ARCIS’
— Application No 1 558 113 for
products in Classes 32 and 33
non-alcoholic
(alcoholic
drinks
for
making beverages) and services in
Class 39 (transport; packaging and
storage of goods)

preparations

and

and

El Coto de Rioja S.A.

Community word marks ‘COTO
DE IMAZ’ (No 339 333) and ‘EL
COTO’ (No 339 408) for products
in Classes 29, 32 and 33, interna-
tional mark No 442 377 and
Spanish marks No 877 219, No
907 966, No 907 967, No 907
985, No 907 989, No 907 993,
No 907 994, No 907 995, No
983 888, No 1 290 986, No
1 614 514, No 1 758 975 and
No 2 172 691).

20.11.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 284/21

Decision of the Opposi-
tion Division:

Opposition dismissed.

Decision of
of Appeal:

the Board

Appeal partially upheld, the trade
mark applied for being refused for
products in Classes 32 and 33.

Pleas in law:

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

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

Mark or sign cited in
opposition:

DATEV eG.

tools,

The German and Community
word marks ‘DATEV’
for goods
and services in Classes 9, 16, 35,
41 and 42 (inter alia, office organi-
sation
data
processing for others, providing of
training and tuition in the field of
data processing
and planning,
developing, establishing and main-
tenance of electronic data proces-
sing programmes).

electronic

Action brought on 13 August 2004 by DATAC AG against
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-341/04)

(2004/C 284/42)

(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 13
August 2004 by DATAC AG, Passau (Germany), represented
by K. Zingsheim, lawyer.

DATEV eG, Nuremberg (Germany), was also a party to the
proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

Decision of the Opposi-
tion Division:

Decision of
of Appeal:

the Board

Pleas in law:

Rejection of the opposition.

Annulment of the decision of the
Opposition Division and referral
the proceedings back to the
of
Opposition Division.

— infringement of Articles 8(1)(b)
and 53(1) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94;

— misapplication of Article 8(5)
of Regulation (EC) No 40/94;

— no likelihood of

confusion

between the opposed marks.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Action brought on 31 August 2004 by Marguerite Chetcuti
against Commission of the European Communities

— annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 12 May
2004 in Case R 176/2002-4;

— reject the opposition entered by DATEV eG;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

Community trade mark
sought:

The applicant.

for
The word mark ‘DATAC’
goods and services in Classes 9,
16, 23 and 42 (inter alia, computer
hardware and parts and computer
software, printed matter, business
affairs and rental and licensing of
computer hardware and software)
— Application No 665 455.

(Case T-357/04)

(2004/C 284/43)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 31 August 2004 by Marguerite
Chetcuti, residing in Zejtun (Malta), represented by Marc-Albert
Lucas, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Declare unlawful point III of competition notice COM/P A/

04 of 6 April 2004;

— Annul the decision of 22 June 2004 of the competition
selection board rejecting her candidature in reliance on that
provision;