Case T-487/08: Action brought on 17 November 2008 — Kureha v OHIM — Sanofi-Aventis (KREMEZIN)
Date: 2008-11-17
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law

C 19/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.1.2009

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

By this appeal, the appellant is seeking the annulment of the
judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (CST) of 4 September
2008, given in Case F-22/07 Lafili v Commission, by which the
CST annulled the decision of the Head of Unit A6 ‘Career struc-
ture, evaluation and promotion’ in the ‘Personnel and Adminis-
tration’ General-Directorate of the Commission of the European
Communities of 11 May 2006, in so far as the judgment under
appeal rejects the appellant's pleas in law alleging infringement
of Articles 44 and 46 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the
European Communities (‘the Staff Regulations’) and Article 7 of
Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations and an infringement of the
principle of legitimate expectations.

In support of his appeal, the appellant raised a single plea alle-
ging the infringement, at first instance, of Articles 44 and 46 of
the Staff Regulations, of Article 7 of Annex XIII to the Staff
Regulations, the infringement of the principles of interpretation
of Community law and of the obligation to state reasons, and a
distortion of the evidence.

Action brought on 17 November 2008 — Kureha v OHIM
— Sanofi-Aventis (KREMEZIN)

(Case T-487/08)

(2009/C 19/60)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Kureha Corp. (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: W. von
der Osten-Sacken and O. Sude, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Sanofi-
Aventis SA (Gentilly, France)

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the
Office
Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) of 15 September 2008 in case
R 1631/2007-4; and

for Harmonisation

the

in

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘KREMEZIN’ for
goods in class 5 — application No 2 906 501

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

or

Mark
trade mark registration
No 529 937 of the word mark ‘KRENOSIN’ for goods in class 5

International

sign cited:

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

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law:
Infringement of Rule 19 and of Rule 20(1) of
Commission Regulation No 2868/95 (1), as well as misuse of
power, as the Board of Appeal wrongly considered that the
other party to the proceedings before it has sufficiently proven
the existence and validity of the earlier trade mark; Infringement
of Article 8(1)(b) in connection with Article 43(2) and (3) of
Council Regulation No 40/94 as the Board of Appeal erred in
its finding that there is a likelihood of confusion between the
trade marks concerned.

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995
implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community
trade mark (OJ 1995 L 303, p. 1).

Action brought on 14 November 2008 — Galileo
International Technology v OHIM — GALILEO SISTEMAS
Y SERVICIOS (GSS GALILEO SISTEMAS Y SERVICIOS)

(Case T-488/08)

(2009/C 19/61)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Galileo International Technology LLC (Bridgetown,
Barbados) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister, K. Gilbert and
M. Blair, Solicitors)

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

— Order the other party to the proceedings before the Board

of Appeal to pay the costs.

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Galileo
Sistemas y Servicios, SL (Tres Cantos, Spain)