Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 27.3.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 80/35 |

---

Action brought on 20 January 2010 — Klaus Goutier v OHIM — Rauch (ARANTAX)

(Case T-13/10)

2010/C 80/58

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Klaus Goutier (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: E.E. Happe, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Norbert Rauch (Herzogenaurach, Germany)

Form of order sought

|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| — | Annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 10 November 2009 (in Case R 1769/2008-4) in so far as the application for a Community mark annulling the contested decision was rejected for the following services:   |  |  | | --- | --- | | — | Class 35 — Tax consultancy, tax preparation, accounting, auditing, professional business consultancy, business consultancy; |  |  |  | | --- | --- | | — | Class 36 — Fiscal assessments, mergers and acquisitions, namely financial consultancy with regard to the purchase or sale of companies and company shares, financial management; |  |  |  | | --- | --- | | — | Class 43 — Provision of legal services, legal research; | |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs. |

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Klaus Goutier

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘ARANTAX’ for services in Classes 35, 36 and 42 (Application No 4 823 084)

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Norbert Rauch

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the German word mark ‘atarax’ No 30 168 707 for goods and services in Classes 9, 35, 37, 41 and 42

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Partial annulment of the Opposition Division’s decision and partial rejection of the Community trade mark application

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009,[(1)](#ntr1-C_2010080EN.01003501-E0001) owing to the absence of likelihood of confusion of the marks at issue

---

[Top](#document1)