Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 20.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 327/34 |

---

Action brought on 1 October 2008 — 1-2-3.TV v OHIM — Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen and Televersal Film- und Fernseh-Produktion (1-2-3.TV)

(Case T-440/08)

(2008/C 327/62)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: 1-2-3.TV GmbH (Unterföhring, Germany) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, A. Renck, T. Dolde und E. Nicolás Gómez, lawyers)

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

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen (Mainz, Germany) and Televersal Film- und Fernseh-Produktion GmbH (Hamburg, Germany)

Form of order sought

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 30 June 2008 (Case R 1076/2007-1); and |

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

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘1-2-3.TV’ for services in classes 35, 38 and 41 — Application No 3 763 133

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen and Televersal Film- und Fernseh-Produktion GmbH

Mark or sign cited in opposition: National figurative mark ‘1, 2 ODER 3 ZDF-ORF-SFDRS’ for goods and services in classes 3, 5, 9, 12, 14, 16, 18, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 35, 38, 41 and 42

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition partly upheld

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 40/94, there being no likelihood of confusion between the marks in opposition on account of the differing overall impression of the marks.

---

[Top](#document1)