Case T-78/08: Action brought on 18 February 2008 — Baldesberger v OHIM (shape of tweezers)
Date: 2008-02-18
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), toiletries, trade-mark law

26.4.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 107/33

Action brought on 11 February 2008 — Berliner Institut
für Vergleichende Sozialforschung v Commission

Action brought on 13 February 2008 — JOOP! v OHIM (!)

(Case T-73/08)

(2008/C 107/54)

(Case T-75/08)

(2008/C 107/55)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Berliner Institut für Vergleichende Sozialforschung eV
(Berlin, Germany) (represented by: B. Henning, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annul the Commission's decision of 26 November 2007
the sum of EUR 23 228,07 in
Agreement
Grant

claiming repayment of
connection with
the
JLS/DAP/2004-1/080/YC’;

‘Daphne

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In May 2005, the applicant and the Commission signed an
agreement on support for a project in connection with the
Daphne II programme (1). By debit note of 26 November 2007,
the defendant reclaimed from the applicant part of the payment
made in connection with this agreement. The applicant brought
the present action against that decision.

The applicant claims in support of its action, first, that the
contested decision is in breach of the obligation to state reasons.
Second, the principle of a fair hearing has been infringed, as the
applicant was not allowed an appropriate period of time to
the
comment and to submit additional documents. Finally,
applicant complains that the contested decision is based on an
erroneous assessment of the facts.

(1) Decision No 803/2004/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 21 April 2004 adopting a programme of Community
action (2004 to 2008) to prevent and combat violence against chil-
dren, young people and women and to protect victims and groups at
risk (the Daphne II programme) (OJ 2004 L 143, p. 1).

Applicant: JOOP! GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by H.
Schmidt-Hollburg and W. Möllering, lawyers)

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 the
Internal Market of

Office
for Harmonisation in the
26 November 2007 in Case R 1134/2007-1;

— Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
to pay the costs including those incurred during the appeal
proceedings

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘!’ for goods
in Classes 14, 18 and 25 (application No 5 332 184)

Decision of the Examiner: Rejection of the application

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation
(EC) No 40/94 (1), as the mark applied for has distinctive char-
acter and its availability does not have to be preserved.

(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 18 February 2008 — Baldesberger v
OHIM (shape of tweezers)

(Case T-78/08)

(2008/C 107/56)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Fides B. Baldesberger (Lugano, Switzerland)
sented by F. Nielsen, lawyer)

(repre-

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

C 107/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

26.4.2008

Form of order sought

— Order OHIM to pay the costs

— Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the
Internal Market of

for Harmonisation in the
Office
12 December 2007 (Case R 1405/2007-4);

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Qiagen GmbH

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘RNAiFect’ for
goods in Classes 1, 5 and 9 (Application No 3 304 813)

Community
depicting
No 5 480 108).

trade mark
tweezers,

for

concerned: Three-dimensional mark
in class 8 (application

goods

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

Decision of the Examiner: Registration refused.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the word mark ‘RNActive’ for
goods in Classes 1 and 5 (Community trade mark No 2 953 768),
albeit that the opposition was brought against registration in
respect of certain goods in Classes 1 and 5

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 (1), as the mark applied for has the requisite distinc-
tive character.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition

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).

Action brought on 19 February 2008 — CureVac v OHIM
— Qiagen (RNAiFect)

(Case T-80/08)

(2008/C 107/57)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 (1) as there is a likelihood of confusion between the
opposing marks due to the identity of the goods and the simi-
larity of the marks.

(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 18 February 2008 — Enercon v OHIM
(E-ship)

(Case T-81/08)

(2008/C 107/58)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Applicant: CureVac GmbH (Tübingen, Germany) (represented by:
F. von Stosch, lawyer)

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

Parties

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Qiagen GmbH (Hilden, Germany)

Form of order sought

Applicant: Enercon GmbH (Aurich, Germany)
R. Böhm, lawyer)

(represented by

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

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of
11 December 2007 in Case R 1219/2006-1 relating to
Opposition No B 771 495;

— Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) of 4 December 2007 (Case R 319/2007-1);

— Refuse registration of Community trade mark No 3 304 813

— order the defendant to pay the costs.