Case T-342/06: Action brought on 1 December 2006 — Angiotech Pharmaceuticals v OHIM (VASCULAR WRAP)
Date: 2006-12-30
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law

30.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/81

Form of order sought

— annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of
7 September 2006 in Case R 1024/2005-1 and, allowing
the appeal lodged against Decision No 2205/2005 of the
Opposition Division, reject Community trade mark applica-
tion No 2.269.256 (figurative mark Stradivari 1715) and
order the applicant for a Community trade mark to pay the
costs of both sets of proceedings;

— order OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred

by the applicant in the present action;

— if necessary, order the intervener to bear her own costs and
to pay those incurred by the applicant in these proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Cristina Ricci.

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘Stradivari 1715’
(application for registration No 2.269.256)
for products in
classes 14, 16 and 18.

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Figurative mark ‘Stradivarius’, for
in classes 14 and 16 (No 1.246.164) and 18
products
(No 506.469).

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition dismissed.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed.

Pleas in law: Incorrect application of Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of
Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community Trade Mark.

— annul the contested decision;

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘GARUM’ for
goods in Class 29 (application No 3501939)

Decision of the Examiner: Refusal of the application

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regu-
lation No 40/94 (1) in that, contrary to the finding by the Board
of Appeal of OHIM in the contested decision, its mark is not
descriptive in relation to the goods designated and having
regard to the relevant public.

(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 1 December 2006 — Angiotech
Pharmaceuticals v OHIM (VASCULAR WRAP)

(Case T-342/06)

(2006/C 326/165)

Language of the case: English

Action brought on 1 December 2006 — Compagnie
générale de Diététique v OHIM (GARUM)

(Case T-341/06)

(2006/C 326/164)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties

Applicant: Compagnie générale de Diététique SAS (Caen, France)
(represented by: J.-J. Evrard and T. de Haan, lawyers)

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

Form of order sought

Parties

Applicant: Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Vancouver, Canada)
(represented by: T. Clark, Barrister)

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

Form of order sought

— Annul decision R 751/2006-2 of

the Second Board of
Appeal, dated 20 September 2006, and remit the application
to the Office of Harmonisation in the Internal Market to
allow it to proceed; or

— in the alternative,

if the Court finds that the application
should only be allowed to proceed in relation to some of
the goods the subject of the application, it should annul the
decision of the Second Board of Appeal in relation to those
goods only and remit the application to proceed before the
Office in accordance with that finding;

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— order that the Office pay the applicant's costs.

C 326/82

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.12.2006

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned:
the word mark ‘VASCULAR
WRAP’ for goods and services in classes 5 and 10 (dressings,
bandages, coatings, compositions and medical devices
for
surgical application) — application number 4220811.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 16 October 2006 —
Kat and Others v Council and Commission

(Case T -530/93, T-531/93, T-533/93, T-1/94, T-3/94, T-4/94,
T-11/94, T-53/94, T-71/94, T-73/94, T-87/94, T-91/94, T-102/
94, T-103/94, T-106/94, T-120/94, T-121/94, T-123/94, T-
124/94, T-253/94 and T-372/94) (1)

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

(2006/C 326/166)

Language of the case: Dutch

in law:

Pleas
Council Regulation 40/94.

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(c) of

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be
removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 334, 9.12.2003.