Case T-231/08: Action brought on 17 June 2008 — Asenbaum Fine Arts v OHIM (WIENER WERKSTÄTTE)
Date: 2008-06-17
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), art trade, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, trade-mark law

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/49

Action brought on 17 June 2008 — Asenbaum Fine Arts v
OHIM (WIENER WERKSTÄTTE)

Action brought on 16 June 2008 — MPDV Mikrolab v
OHIM (ROI ANALYZER)

(Case T-231/08)

(2008/C 223/85)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Asenbaum Fine Arts Ltd (London, United Kingdom)
(represented by: P. Vögel, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

— Alter the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 10 April
2008 (R 1571/2006-4) so as to allow the applicant's appeal
of 29 November 2006 in its entirety;

In the alternative annul the contested decision and refer the
matter back to the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market to complete the proceedings;

— Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the costs of
the appeal proceedings.

(Case T-233/08)

(2008/C 223/86)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: MPDV Mikrolab GmbH, Mikroprozessordatenverarbei-
tung und Mikroprozessorlabor (Mosbach, Germany) (represented
by: W. Göpfert, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM

of 15 April 2008 in Case R 1525/2006-4;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘ROI ANALYZER’
for goods and services in Classes 9, 35 and 42 (Application
No 4 866 042).

Decision of the Examiner: Application rejected in part.

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) in that the trade mark applied for does not
lack distinctive character and no requirement of availability
exists for it.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

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

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘WIENER WERK-
STÄTTE’ for goods in Class 14 (Application No 4 207 783).

Decision of the Examiner: Application rejected.

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) in that the trade mark applied for is neither
descriptive nor devoid of distinctive character.

(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 16 June 2008 — HPA v Commission

(Case T-236/08)

(2008/C 223/87)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Hoofdproductschap Akkerbouw (The Hague, Nether-
lands) (represented by: R.J.M. van den Tweel)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities