Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 15.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 209/60 |

---

Action brought on 16 June 2008 — Procter & Gamble v OHIM — Laboratorios Alcala Farma (oli)

(Case T-240/08)

(2008/C 209/108)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: The Procter & Gamble Company (Cincinnati, United States) (represented by: N. Beckett and T. Scourfield, Solicitors)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Laboratorios Alcala Farma SL (Alcala de Henares, Spain).

Form of order sought

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Annul the decisions of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 2 April 2008 in case R 1481/2007-2 and of the Opposition Division of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 17 July 2007 in opposition proceedings No B 893 216; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | allow the applicant's opposition to the registration as a Community trade mark of the application dated 4 October 2004 for the figurative mark ‘oli’ for goods in classes 3 and 5; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | order OHIM to refuse registration of the said application dated 4 October 2004: and |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | order the other parties hereto to pay the costs. |

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘oli’ for goods in classes 3 and 5 — application No 4 059 176

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Mark or sign cited: The Community trade marks ‘OLAY’ for goods in classes 3 and 5

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

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 40/94 as the trade marks concerned are similar and the use of the trade mark applied for is likely to cause confusion.

---

[Top](#document1)