Case T-242/06: Action brought on 5 September 2006 — Cabrera Sánchez v OHIM — Industrias Cárnicas Valle (El charcutero artesano)
Date: 2006-10-28
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), foodstuff, meat, trade-mark law

28.10.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/25

The applicant alleges, first, breach of Article 10 EC in conjunc-
tion with the second paragraph of Article 1 EU. The applicant
takes the view that the Commission is under an obligation to
grant it access to the document which it has applied for in the
framework of the reciprocal duties of genuine cooperation in
accordance with the principle of transparency, on the ground
that there is a strong public and parliamentary interest in full
disclosure of this document.

The applicant further alleges breach of Article 255 EC and
Article 2(1) of the transparency regulation. It submits in this
regard that the Commission was wrong to base its refusal to
grant access to the document applied for on the second indent
of Article 4(2) of the transparency regulation, since disclosure
of the document would not have prejudiced the Commission's
legal advice. The defendant therefore incorrectly exercised its
discretion.

(1) Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European
Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145,
p. 43).

Pleas in law: The contested decision is unlawful inasmuch as
registration was wrongly refused pursuant to Article 7(1)(c) of
Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1) on the basis that the mark applied
for is descriptive and pursuant to Article 7(1)(b) thereof on the
ground that it lacks distinctiveness.

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

Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

Action brought on 5 September 2006 — Cabrera Sánchez
v OHIM — Industrias Cárnicas Valle (El charcutero arte-
sano)

(Case T-242/06)

(2006/C 261/48)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Action brought on 7 September 2006 — Reitz and von
Gadomski v OHIM (CMD-CLINIC)

Parties

(Case T-241/06)

(2006/C 261/47)

Applicant: Miguel Cabrera Sánchez (Móstoles, Spain)
(repre-
sented by: J. A. Calderón Chavero and T. Villate Consonni,
lawyers)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

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

Parties

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Industrias Cárnicas Valle SA

Applicants: J. Reitz (Aumühle, Germany) and B. von Gadomski
(Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: U. Poser, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

— annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of

16 June 2006 in Case R-790/2005-1;

Form of order sought

— annul Decision 2239/2005 in opposition No 637 647;

— annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of 6 July

— order the Opposition Division to refuse in full registration

2006 (R0372/2006-4);

of the mark concerned;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘CMD-CLINIC’
in respect of goods and services in Classes 5, 10 and 44 (Appli-
cation No 3 661 337).

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Industrias Cárnicas Valle
SA

Decision of the Examiner: Partial refusal to register.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal.

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative colour mark EL
CHARCUTERO ARTESANO (Application No 2 823 193) for
goods in Class 29

C 261/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.10.2006

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:
The applicant

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of appeal

Mark or sign cited in opposition: National figurative mark (No
2 047 511) EL CHARCUTERO for goods in Class 29

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition
and registration of the mark applied for

Pleas in law: The applicant claims that, contrary to that which
the Board of Appeal of OHIM stated in the contested decision,
its trade mark is arbitrary and has a sufficiently distinctive char-
acter as required by Council Regulation No 40/94 (1) in relation
to the goods and services claimed.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

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

Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1)

Pleas in law: Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 on the Community trade mark

Action brought on 4 September 2006 — Euro-Information
v OHIM (CYBERGUICHET )

(Case T-245/06)

(2006/C 261/49)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties

Applicant: Européenne de traitement de l'information SAS
(Euro-Information)
(represented by: P.
(Strasbourg, France)
Greffe, A. Jacquet and J. Schouman, lawyers)

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

Form of order sought by the applicant

— annulment of the whole of the decision of the First Board
of Appeal of OHIM of 5 July 2006, Case R 67/2006-1,
which refused the registration of CYBERGUICHET as a
Community trade mark under application No 4 114 575 in
respect of all the goods and services claimed in Classes 9,
36 and 38;

— registration of CYBERGUICHET as a Community trade
mark under application No 4 114 575 in respect of all the
goods and services claimed.

Action brought on 8 September 2006 — Redcats v OHIM
— Revert & Cía (REVERIE)

(Case T-246/06)

(2006/C 261/50)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Redcats SA (Roubaix, France)
Bertrand, lawyer)

(represented by: A.

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Manuel
Revert y Cia SA (Onteniente, Spain)

Form of order sought

— […] Thus the contested decision of the Board of Appeal of

the OHIM must be reversed.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘REVERIE’ for
goods in classes 16, 20 and 24 — application No 2 146 447

Community trade mark concerned: Work mark ‘CYBERGUICHET’
for goods and services in Classes 9, 36 and 38 (application No
4 114 575)

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:
Manuel Revert y Cía., SA

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of registration

Mark or sign cited: The Community figurative mark ‘REVERT’
for goods and services in classes 24, 25 and 39