Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

24.8.2002 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 202/35

Incorrect application of likelihood of confusion exists Mark invoked in the International mark No 516269
Article 8(1)(b) of Regu- because of the undisputed identity opposition proceedings: ‘Roberto’ for goods in Classes 29
lation No 40/94: or, at least, similarity of the goods, and 30 and the opponent’s trading
the visual and phonetic similarity name ‘ROBERTO’
of the marks and the inherent
distinctiveness of the mark cited Decision of the oppo- Dismissal of the opposition
in opposition. sition division:

Decision of the Board of Annulment of the decision of the
Appeal: opposition division and remittal
of the application

Pleas in law relied on: — Infringement of Rule 16 of
Regulation (EC) No 2868/
95 ( [1] );
**Action brought on 17 June 2002 by Freiberger Lebensmit-**
**tel GmbH & Co. Produktions- und Vertriebs KG against** — Infringement of
**the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market** Article 42(1), in conjunction
**(Trade Marks and Designs)** with Article 8(2) and (4),
of Regulation (EC) No 40/
94 ( [2] ).
**(Case T-188/02)**

(2002/C 202/57) ( [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).
_(Language of the case to be determined in accordance with_ ( [2] ) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the
_Article 131(2) of the Rules of Procedure Language in which the_ Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).
_application was made: German)_

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
17 June 2002 by Freiberger Lebensmittel GmbH & Co.
**Action brought on 17 June 2002 by Anita Jannice O** **[¨ ]** **ster-**
Produktions- und Vertriebs KG, of Berlin, Germany, represent**holm against Commission of the European Communities**
ed by K.-D. Rathke. Roberto S.A. of Chevilly, France, was an
additional party before the Board of Appeal.
**(Case T-190/02)**

The applicant claims that the Court should:
(2002/C 202/58)

—
annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of
_(Language of the case: French)_
28.2.2002 in Case R 1155/2000-4;

—
order the opponent to pay the costs.
An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 17 June 2002 by Anita Jannice
_Pleas in law and main arguments_ O [¨ ] sterholm, residing in Stockholm, represented by Juan Ramon
Iturriagagoitia Bassas, lawyer.

Applicant for the Com- The applicant
The applicant claims that the Court should:
munity trade mark:

—
Trade mark applied for: Word mark ‘Alberto’ for goods in annul the decision of the appointing authority of
Classes 29 and 30 — Application 11 March 2002 replying to complaint No 389/01 lodged
No 26211 by J. O [¨ ] sterholm;

Proprietor of the trade Roberto S.A. — annul in part the decision of the Directorate General for
mark right invoked in Personnel and Administration of the European Comthe opposition proceed- mission of 2 July 2001 concerning the computation of
ings: annual leave between 8 and 31 July 2000;