Case T-296/08: Action brought on 28 July 2008 — Berliner Institut für Vergleichende Sozialforschung v Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2008-07-28
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), contract, economic support, payment, social integration

27.9.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 247/19

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) of 29 May 2008 in Case R 318/2008-4, noti-
fied on 2 June 2008;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

— Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) of 7 May 2008 in case R 808/2007-1; and

— Order the defendant and the other party to the proceedings

before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘Deutsche BKK’
for services in Classes 36, 41 and 44 (application No 4 724 894).

Decision of the Examiner: Refusal of the application.

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

Pleas in law:

— Infringement of Article 73 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1)
due to the rejection of documents without the possibility for
prior comments;

— Infringement of the first sentence of Article 4(1) of Regu-
lation No 40/94 due to the Office's improper investigation
of the facts;

— Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation
No 40/94 due to denial of protection for the mark ‘Deutsche
BKK’ because of absolute grounds for refusal of protection
for the mark;

— Infringement of Article 7(3) of Regulation No 40/94 due to
refusal to recognise distinctive character in consequence of
use.

(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 23 July 2008 — CPS Color Group v
OHIM — Fema Farben und Putze (TEMACOLOR)

(Case T-295/08)

(2008/C 247/37)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘TEMACOLOR’
for goods in class 2

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The
other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited: German trade mark registration No 2 104 061
of the word mark ‘FEMA-Color’ for goods in class 2; interna-
tional trade mark registration No 691 406 of the word mark
‘FEMA-Color’ for goods in class 2

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in its
entirety

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: The Board of Appeal erred in law in determining
that
in
the conflicting trade marks are confusingly similar,
breach of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation 40/94.

Action brought on 28 July 2008 — Berliner Institut für
the
Vergleichende Sozialforschung v Commission of

European Communities

(Case T-296/08)

(2008/C 247/38)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Berliner Institut für Vergleichende Sozialforschung eV
(Berlin, Germany) (represented by: U. Claus,
lawyer, acting as
Agent)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Parties

Form of order sought

Applicant: CPS Color Group Oy (Vantaa, Finland) (represented
by: P. Hagman, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fema
Farben und Putze GmbH (Ettlingen, Germany)

— Annul the Commission Decision of 23 May 2008 defini-
tively granting a payment under the ‘Integration indicators
and generation change’ programme on the basis of
the
financing arrangement JLS/2004/INTI/077, insofar as appli-
cant's application for a final payment of EUR 59 592,77,
exceeding the authorised amount, was rejected;

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

C 247/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

27.9.2008

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant and the Commission signed a contract
in
May 2005 concerning the promotion of a project in the context
of the INTI programme. By letter dated 23 May 2008, the
defendant granted the applicant a lower final payment than that
for which the latter had applied. The present action is directed
against the rejection of its application for payment of the costs
exceeding the authorised sum.

The applicant asserts in support of its action that the Commis-
sion's view that a change of project participants after the
conclusion of the financing arrangement is only possible if an
appropriate alteration agreement
is concluded is unfounded.
This is due to the fact that a provision to that effect is not
included in the financing arrangement. Further, the Commission
refused to recognise costs on various grounds, which are incom-
patible with the financing arrangement and with previous insti-
tutional practice.

Action brought on 29 July 2008 — Mepos Electronics v
OHIM (MEPOS)

(Case T-297/08)

(2008/C 247/39)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

European Union as the Board of Appeal erred in concluding
that the examiner has followed a lawful proceeding in the appli-
cation process; infringement of Article 78 of Council Regulation
No 40/94 as the Board of Appeal erred by not granting the
request for restitutio in integrum for failure to comply with the
time-limit to file an appeal.

Action brought on 31 July 2008 — Aldi v OHIM —
Catalana de Telecomunicacions Societat Operadora de
Xarxes (ALDI)

(Case T-298/08)

(2008/C 247/40)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Aldi GmbH & Co. KG (Mülheim an der Ruhr,
Germany)
(represented by: N. Lützenrath, U. Rademacher, L.
Kolks and C. Fürsen, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Catalana de Telecomunicacions Societat Operadora de Xarxes,
SA (Barcelona, Spain)

Applicant: Mepos Electronics Ltd (Kaohsiung, Taiwan)
sented by M. Wirtz, lawyer)

(repre-

Form of order sought

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

Form of order sought

— Annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of
Internal Market
for Harmonisation in the
and Designs) of 14 May 2008 (Case

the Office
(Trade Marks
No R 1301/2007-1);

— Order the defendant to pay all the costs.

— Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) of 28 May 2008 in case R 437/2008-2;

Pleas in law and main arguments

— Grant the request for restitutio in integrum; and

Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant.

— Order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘MEPOS’ for
goods in class 9 — application No 5 770 383

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the applicant's trade mark

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law:
Infringement of Articles 36, 77(a) and 79 of
Council Regulation No 40/94, as well as Article 6 of European
Convention on Human Rights and Article 6(2) of Treaty on

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘ALDI’ for goods
and 39 (application
and
No 3 360 914).

in Classes 35, 38,

services

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:
de
Catalana
Xarxes, SA.

Societat Operadora

Telecomunicacions

de

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the Spanish word mark ‘ALPI’ for
services in Class 38 (Mark No 2 262 920), the Spanish word
mark ‘ALPI’ for services in Class 39 (Mark No 2 262 921) and
the international word mark ‘ALPI’ for services in Classes 37,
38, 39 and 42 (Mark No 789 344), opposition being filed to
registration for services in Class 38.