Case T-159/06: Action brought on 19 June 2006 — Estancia Piedra v OHIM — Franciscan Vineyards (ESTANCIA PIEDRA)
Date: 2006-08-12
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), computer network, exchange of information, foodstuff, trade-mark law, wine

12.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/25

Form of order sought

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application

— Annul the European Commission's Memorandum No 2984
of 31 March 2006 concerning the PEP Sicilia Programme
(claim for payment No 2005 0601) containing a request to
‘comply with the conditions set out
in Commissioner
Barnier's letter of 29 July 2003 as to the eligibility of
payments on account made in the contex of aid schemes’,
together with all connected and prior acts.

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied
on in Case T-345/04 Italian Republic v Commission. (1)

(1) OJ C 262, 23.10.2004, p. 55.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Partial dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council
Regulation No 40/94 and failure to take prior national registra-
tions into account.

Action brought on 19 June 2006 — Estancia Piedra v
OHIM — Franciscan Vineyards (ESTANCIA PIEDRA)

(Case T-159/06)

(2006/C 190/46)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Action brought on 20 June 2006 — Adobe v OHIM (FLEX)

Applicant: Estancia Piedra SL (Toro, Spain) (represented by: B.
Cordery, Solicitor)

(Case T-158/06)

(2006/C 190/45)

Language of the case: English

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fran-
ciscan Vineyards Inc. (St. Helena, USA)

Parties

Form of order sought

Applicant: Adobe Systems Inc. (San Jose, USA) (represented by:
M. Graf, lawyer)

— Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of
28 March 2006 (Case R 363/2005-2);

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

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade
Marks and Designs) of 11 April 2006 in Case R
1430/2005-2 Adobe Systems Incorporated v OHIM (Flex)
insofar as it dismissed the appeal for other goods than
‘computer hardware; computer peripherals and data proces-
sing equipment’ in class 9 and the services applied for of
class 42.

— Order the Office to bear its own costs and to pay those of

the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘FLEX’
for
goods and services in classes 9, 38 and 42 — application No
3 795 011

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark subject of the application for a
declaration of invalidity: The figurative mark ‘ESTANCIA PIEDRA’
for services in class 35 (information and consultancy services in
relation to retailing via worldwide computer networks; import-
export of wines) — Community trade mark No 2 127 868

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade
mark: Franciscan Vineyards Inc.

Trade mark right of the party requesting the declaration of invalidity:
The Community word mark ‘ESTANCIA’ for products in classes
29, 30 and 33 (meat, fish, coffee, tea, alcoholic beverages …)

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Declaration of invalidity of
the Community trade mark

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

C 190/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

12.8.2006

Pleas in law: Firstly, infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council
Regulation No 40/94 as it was concluded that there was a like-
lihood of confusion between the earlier mark and ‘ESTANCIA
the procedural require-
PIEDRA’. Secondly,
ments since the Board of Appeal accepted, according to the
applicant, an invalid and late filed authorisation from Fran-
ciscan Vineyards for their representatives and illegitimately
purported to extend the time-limit for Franciscan Vineyards to
file the authorisation.

infringement of

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Firstly, infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council
Regulation No 40/94 as it was concluded that there was a like-
lihood of confusion between the earlier mark and ‘ESTANCIA
PIEDRA’. Secondly,
the procedural require-
ments since the Board of Appeal accepted, according to the
applicant, an invalid and late filed authorisation from Fran-
ciscan Vineyards for their representatives and illegitimately
extended the time limit for Franciscan Vineyards to file the
authorisation.

infringement of

Action brought on 19 June 2006 — Estancia Piedra v
OHIM — Franciscan Vineyards (ESTANCIA PIEDRA)

(Case T-160/06)

(2006/C 190/47)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Estancia Piedra SL (Toro, Spain) (represented by: B.
Cordery, Solicitor)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fran-
ciscan Vineyards Inc. (St. Helena, USA)

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of
28 March 2006 (Case R 361/2005-2);

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark subject of the application for a
declaration of invalidity: The figurative mark ‘ESTANCIA PIEDRA’
for products in class 33 (Alcoholic beverages) — Community
trade mark No 1 894 831

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade
mark: Franciscan Vineyards Inc.

Trade mark right of the party requesting the declaration of invalidity:
The Community word mark ‘ESTANCIA’ for products in classes
29, 30 and 33 (meat, fish, coffee, tea, alcoholic beverages …)

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Declaration of invalidity of
the Community trade mark

Action brought on 28 June 2006 — BA.LA. di Lanciotti V.
& C. S.A.S. and Others v Commission

(Case T-163/06)

(2006/C 190/48)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicants: BA.LA. di Lanciotti V. & C. S.A.S. and Others (repre-
sented by: P.M. Tabellini, G. Celona, E. Bidoggia and E.M.
Tabellini)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought by the applicants

— that the Court of First Instance should declare admissible

the action with regard to all the applicants

— that, on the merits, the Court should annul Article 1(1) and
(2)(b) of and recitals 28 to 31 and 250 to 252 in the
preamble to Commission Regulation (EC) No 553/2006 of
23 March 2006 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty
on imports of certain footwear with uppers of
leather
originating in the People's Republic of China and Vietnam,
and any preliminary or connected measure,
in so far as
they define children's footwear and exclude it from being
subject to the anti-dumping duty

— that the Court should order the defendant to pay all the

applicants' costs

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants in this case are all manufacturers, either exclu-
sively or chiefly, of children's footwear. They are situated so
close to one another as to form a ‘footwear district’ on the
boundary between the provinces of Fermo and Macerata.