Case T-458/05: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 20 November 2007 — Tegometall International v OHIM — Wuppermann (TEK) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Application for the Community word mark TEK — Subject-matter of the proceedings — Observance of the rights of the defence — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b),(c) and (g) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
Date: 2007-11-20
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), furniture industry, trade-mark law

12.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 8/13

Re:

Re:

the Commission decision of
Application for annulment of
13 July 2004 adopting the applicant's definitive career develop-
ment report for the period from 1 January to 31 December 2003

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal
of OHIM of 14 September 2005 (Case R 1068/2004-1), relating
to opposition proceedings between Fujitsu Siemens Computers
GmbH and Gateway, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. annuls the decision of 13 July 2004 adopting the career develop-
ment report in respect of Mr Hippocrate Vounakis for the period
from 1 January until 31 December 2003 as far as concerns the
heading ‘Productivity’;

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. orders the Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 205, 20.8.2005.

2. Orders Gateway, Inc., to bear its own costs and to pay those of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
Designs).

(1) OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 27 November
2007 — GATEWAY v OHIM — Fujitsu Siemens Computers
(ACTIVY Media Gateway)

(Case T-434/05) (1)

(Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Appli-
the Community word mark ACTIVY Media
cation for
Gateway — Earlier Community and national word and figura-
tive marks Gateway and GATEWAY — Relative grounds for
refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Absence of similarity
between the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 — Article 8(5) of Regulation No 40/94)

(2008/C 8/24)

Language of the case: English

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 20 November
2007 — Tegometall International v OHIM — Wuppermann
(TEK)

(Case T-458/05) (1)

(Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Applica-
tion for the Community word mark TEK — Subject-matter of
the proceedings — Observance of the rights of the defence —
Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character —
Article 7(1)(b),(c) and (g) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation
(EC) No 40/94)

(2008/C 8/25)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Gateway, Inc. (Irvine, California, United States) (repre-
sented initially by: C.R. Jones and P. Massey, and subsequently
by C.R. Jones and E.S. Mackenzie, solicitors)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs)
J. Laporta Insa,
Agent)

(represented by:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Fujitsu Siemens Computers GmbH (Munich, Germany)

Parties

Applicant: Tegometall
Switzerland) (represented by: H. Timmann, lawyer)

International AG (Lengwil-Oberhofen,

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs)
J. Weberndörfer,
Agent)

(represented by:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM
intervener before the Court of First
Instance: Wuppermann AG
(Leverkusen, Germany) (represented: initially by H. Huisken, and
subsequently by I. Friedhoff, lawyers)

C 8/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

12.1.2008

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of
Appeal of OHIM of 21 October 2005 (Case R 1063/2004-2), as
rectified on 16 November 2005, relating to invalidity proceed-
ings between Wuppermann AG and Tegometall International
AG.

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of
Appeal of OHIM of 16 February 2006 in Case R 3/2005-2
relating to opposition proceedings between Lidl Stiftung &
Co. KG and Wesergold Getränkeindustrie GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the applicant to pay the costs, except those incurred by the

intervener;

2. Orders Wesergold Getränkeindustrie GmbH & Co. KG to pay the

costs.

3. Orders the intervener to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.

(1) OJ C 143, 17.6.2006.

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 21 November
2007 — Wesergold Getränkeindustrie v OHIM — Lidl
Stiftung (VITAL FIT)

(Case T-111/06) (1)

(Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Appli-
cation for the Community figurative mark VITAL FIT —
Earlier national word mark VITAFIT — Relative ground for
refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of
Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Right to a fair hearing — Obli-
gation to state reasons)

(2008/C 8/26)

Language of the case: German

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 20 November
2007 — Castellani v OHIM — Markant Handels und
Service (CASTELLANI)

(Case T-149/06) (1)

for

the

figurative

(Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Appli-
cation
trade mark
CASTELLANI — Earlier national word marks CASTELLUM
and CASTELLUCA — Relative ground of refusal — Likeli-
hood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94)

Community

(2008/C 8/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Wesergold Getränkeindustrie GmbH & Co. KG
(Rinteln, Germany) (represented by: P. Goldenbaum, T. Melchert
and I. Rohr, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, Agent)

Applicant: Castellani SpA (Campagna Gello, Italy) (represented
by: A. Di Maso and M. Di Maso, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. García Murillo,
agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM,
intervener before the Court of First Instance: Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG
(Neckarsulm, Germany) (represented by: M. Schaeffer, lawyer)

The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of
OHIM: Markant Handels und Service GmbH (Offenburg,
Germany)