Case T-102/06: Action brought on  4 April 2006  — Investire Partecipazioni v Commission
Date: 2006-05-20
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Community support framework, European Commission, Structural Funds, action for annulment (EU), balance of payments assistance, investment aid, venture capital

C 121/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.5.2006

Pleas in law and main arguments

Form of order sought

Applicant for the Community trade mark: Comercial Jacinto
Parera SA

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘FILDOR’ for
goods in classes 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26 — application No 831
834

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceed-
ings: The applicant

Mark or sign cited: The national and international word and
figurative marks ‘FILDOR’ and ‘PHILDAR’ for goods in classes
22, 23, 24, 25 and 26

— Annul the Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM
of 17 January 2006, upholding the refusal of the applica-
tion for Community trade mark No 2 325 256 ‘Castell del
Remei (figurative)’, which should consequently be registered
by OHIM;

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Castell del Remei

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the application
for the trade mark in question

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative trade mark ‘Castell
del Remei ODA’
(application No 2 325 256) for goods in
Classes 29, 30 and 33

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the Opposition
Division's decision

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceed-
ings: Bodegas Roda, S.A.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b), 62 and 73 of
Council Regulation No 40/94 as the conflicting trade marks are
visually and phonetically similar, as the applicant did not have
the opportunity to present its comments on the assessment of
the modes of purchase of the goods in question, and as the
Board of Appeal rejected the opposition on the basis of the
earlier national figurative mark ‘PHILDAR’ without examining
the earlier national word mark ‘FILDOR’.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Spanish word marks ‘RODA’
‘RODA II’ (No
(No 1 757 553),
2 006 615) and ‘BODEGAS RODA’ (No 137 050) for goods in
Class 33, and the trade name ‘BODEGAS RODA, S.A.’
‘for the
undertaking producing and maturing wines …’

‘RODA I’ (No 2 006 616),

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld, refusal of
registration

Action brought on 23 March 2006 — Castell del Remei v
OHIM

(Case T -101/06)

(2006/C 121/28)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Castell del Remei, S.L. (Lérida, Spain) (represented by:
Fernand de Visscher, Emmanuel Cornu, Donatienne Moreau,
Jorge Grau Mora, Alejandro Angulo Lafora, Maite Ferrándiz
Avendaño, María Baylos Morales and Antonio Velázquez
Ibáñez, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs)

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Incorrect application of Article 8(1)(b) of Regu-
lation No 40/94 on the Community trade mark

Action brought on 4 April 2006 — Investire Partecipa-
zioni v Commission

(Case T-102/06)

(2006/C 121/29)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Investire Partecipazioni SpA (Rome,
Applicant:
sented by: G.M. Roberti and A. Franchi, lawyers)

Italy)

(repre-

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of
OHIM: Bodegas Roda (Haro, La Rioja, Spain)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

20.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 121/17

Form of order sought

— annulment of Commission Decision C (2005) 4683 of 25

November 2005;

— declaration under Article 241 EC that points B.12 and C.2
of Datasheet No 19 annexed to Commission Decision
97/322/EC of 23 April 1997 are unlawful and inapplicable;

— order that the Commission pay the costs.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceed-
ings: Antonio Segura Sánchez

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Figurative Community and
Spanish trade marks ‘YOKONO’ for goods in Classes 25 (No
1 099 356) and 18, 25 and 39 (No 336 750)

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld in part
and refusal of the application for registration for certain goods
in Classes 18 and 25

Pleas in law and main arguments

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

The applicant submits that the contested decision should be
annulled on grounds similar to those put forward in Case T-
418/05 Investire Partecipazioni v Commission (OJ C 22 of
28.1.06, p. 21).

Pleas in law: Incorrect application of Article 8(1)(b) of Regu-
lation No 40/94 on the Community trade mark

Action brought on 7 April 2006 — InterVideo v OHIM

Action brought on 27 March 2006 — ESOTRADE v OHIM

(Case T-103/06)

(2006/C 121/30)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

(Case T-105/06)

(2006/C 121/31)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: InterVideo, Inc. (California, USA) (represented by: K.
Manhaeve, lawyer)

Applicant: ESOTRADE, S.A.
Jaime de Rivera Lamo de Espinosa, lawyer)

(Madrid, Spain)

(represented by

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs)

Form of order sought

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:
Antonio Segura Sánchez

— Annul the decision of the Board of Appeal of 31 January

2006;

Form of order sought

— Annul the Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of
OHIM of 10 January 2006 in Case R 217/2004-2 in the
dispute between the marks YOKANA and YOKONO;

— declare the Community trade mark No 1 600 659,

‘YOKANA’ eligible for registration;

— order the defendant to pay all the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘WinDVD
Creator’ for goods in class 9 — application No 4 106 936

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application

— order the defendant to pay the costs of both the present

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

and the earlier proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘YOKANA’
(application No 1 600 659) for goods in Classes 14, 18 and 25

Pleas in law: Violation of Articles 4 and 7(1)(b) and (c) of
Council Regulation No 40/94 as the Board of Appeal has
defined the relevant public incorrectly. The relevant public is,
according to the applicant, the average consumer and not PC
users familiar with specific computer language.