Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 202/34 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 24.8.2002

The applicant claims that the Court should: **Action brought on 13 June 2002 by Succession Picasso**
**against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal**
— annul the decisions of 22.3.02 of the OHIM’s First Board **Market**
of Appeal in Case 115/2000-1 and 15.11.99 of the
OHIM’s Opposition Division; **(Case T-185/02)**

—
allow registration of Community Trade Mark No 557108
(2002/C 202/56)
‘mundicolor’ to proceed in respect of all services in
Class 39 ‘transport services and travel arrangements’
and Class 42 ‘providing of food and drink; temporary _(Language of the case: English)_
accommodation’;

—
order the opponent(s) to pay the costs.
An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 13 June 2002 by Succession
_Pleas in law and main arguments_ Picasso, represented by Charles Gielen, lawyer. A further
party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal was
DaimlerChrysler AG (Intellectual Property Management).

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

—
Community trade mark Word mark MUNDICOR (appli- annul the Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of
applied for: cation published in Community 18 March 2002 and of the Opposition Division of
Trade Mark Bulletin No 27/98, 11 January 2001;
p. 600 of 14 April 1998) for
goods in 42 classes of the — declare that the opposition filed by the applicant against
nomenclature. the application for registration of the mark PICARO is
successful and refuse the application for the mark in its
Owner of the mark or IBERIA Lı´neas Aéreas de Espan˜a entirety and/or make any other order that the Court
sign relied on in the S.A. deems fit;
opposition proceedings:

—
order DaimlerChrysler to pay all costs of the proceedings.
Mark or sign opposed: Spanish word mark MUNDICOLOR for goods in Class 39 (passenger transport services, excursions and tourist promotions) and
_Pleas in law and main arguments_
42 (hotel accommodation services, travel arrangements and
organisation of holidays).
Mixed international mark MUNDI Applicant for the Com- DaimlerChrysler
munity trade mark:
COLOR, extended to France, Italy,
Austria and the Benelux countries
The Community trade Word mark ‘PICARO’ — Applifor ‘travel planning services and
mark sought: cation No 927764, relating to
organisation of travel’ in Class 39
and ‘services involving hotel goods in Class 12 (vehicles and
accommodation and food’ in parts thereof).
Class 42.
Proprietor of the trade Succession Picasso.
mark or sign right cited
Decision of the oppo- Application allowed.
sition division: in the opposition proceedings:

Decision of the Board of Dismissal of the appeal brought
Trade mark or sign right The word mark ‘PICASSO’ (ComAppeal: by El Corte Inglés S.A.
cited in the opposition munity trade mark registration
proceedings: No 614567).
Grounds relied on: Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b)
of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (likeDecision of the Oppo- Decision of the Board of Appeal:
lihood of confusion).
sition Division:Rejection
of the opposition.

Dismissal of the appeal. Grounds of claim:

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;