Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 304/32 EN Official Journal of the European Union 13.12.2003

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—
set aside the decision of the First Board of Appeal of
OHIM of 9 July 2003 in Case R 0576/2002-1;

—
refuse to register as a Community mark No 488.940
DAVID LLOYD in Class 25, and

—
order the other party or parties to pay the costs.

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

The pleas in law and main arguments are those already put
forward in Case T-341/03 El Corte Inglés v OHIM.

The Community trade mark which is the subject of the dispute
is the mark ‘DAVID LLOYD’ (Application No 488.940, for
goods in Classes 3, 5, 25, 28, 36, 41 and 42). The applicant,
the marks cited in the opposition proceedings, the proprietor
and the decisions of the Opposition Division and the Board of
Appeal are identical to those referred to in that case.

**Action brought on 2 October 2003 by SAIWA S.p.A.**
**against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal**
**Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)**

**(Case T-344/03)**

(2003/C 304/59)

_(Language of the case: Italian)_

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
2 October 2003 by SAIWA S.p.A., represented by Giuseppe
Sena, Paola Tarchini, Jean-Pierre Karsenty and Martine Karsenty-Ricard, lawyers. Barilla Alimentare S.p.A. was also a party
to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—
annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of
OHIM of 18 July 2003 in Case R 480/2002-4; order that
registration be refused in respect of Barilla’s Community
trade mark application No 289405; order the defendant
to pay all the costs.

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

Applicant for Com- Barilla Alimentare S.p.A.
munity trade mark:

Community trade mark Figurative mark including the
sought: words ‘SELEZIONE ORO’ and
‘BARILLA’ — Application No
289.405 for products in Class
30 (pasta, flour and preparations
made from cereals, bread, pastry
and confectionery, yeast, bakingpowder, sauces).

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

Mark or sign cited in Word marks ‘ORO’ (Italian trade
opposition: mark No 307376 and international trade mark No 435773)
and ‘ORO SAIWA’ (Italian trade
mark No 332.864) for products
in Class 30.

Decision of the Oppo- Opposition refused.
sition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal dismissed.
Appeal:

Pleas in law: Incorrect application of Article
8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/
94 (likelihood of confusion).

**Action brought on 30 October 2003 by Frischpack GmbH**
**& Co KG against the Office for Harmonisation in the**
**Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)**

**(Case T-360/03)**

(2003/C 304/60)

_(Language of the case: 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
30 October 2003 by Frischpack GmbH & Co KG, Mailling
(Germany), represented by P. Bornemann, lawyer.

13.12.2003 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 304/33

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—
alter the decision in Appeal R 236/2003-2, and annul it
in part, namely in respect of the goods ‘cheese slices in
large packs, not intended for the final consumer’;

—
order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

The trade mark applied Three-dimensional mark in the
for: form of a cheese box — Application No 2 631 745.

Goods or services con- Goods in Class 29 (foodstuffs in
cerned: sliced form, in particular slices of
cheese).

Decision contested Refusal of registration by the
before the Board of examiner.
Appeal:

Decision of the Board of Appeal dismissed.
Appeal:

Grounds of action: — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation
(EC) No 40/94 has been
infringed.

— It is not to be denied that the
mark has the distinctiveness
necessary for registration.

—
A need to preserve availability is not apparent.

**Action brought on 31 October 2003 by Antonio Milano**
**against the Commission of the European Communities**

**(Case T-362/03)**

(2003/C 304/61)

_(Language of the case: Italian)_

An action against the European Commission was brought
before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities

on 31 October 2003 by Antonio Milano, represented and
defended by Stefano Scarano.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—
annul the act of the European Commission — European
Communities Personnel Selection Office — communicated by memorandum of 24 March 2003 and notified
to the applicant on 31 March 2003, in which the selection
board decided that the applicant’s application was inadmissible on the basis of the request for review made by
Mr Milano, annul the decision of 10 February 2003 of
the Commission in which the selection board refused the
applicant admission to the oral test in open competition
COM/A/4/02 ‘Administrators’, and annul the decision of
17 July 2003 of the appointing authority in which the
complaint submitted by Mr Milano under Article 90(2)
of the Staff Regulations and lodged at DG ADMIN on
24 April 2003 with number R/187/03 was rejected;

—
full compensation in damages for economic and moral
loss

—
recovery of costs

_Pleas and main arguments_

This action is brought against the decision of the selection
board for open competition COM/A/4/02 ‘Administrators’,
through qualifications and an oral test, with a view to
constituting a reserve list for the recruitment of a head of
representation in grade A3 in Rome, excluding the applicant
from admission to the oral test in the above-mentioned
competition.

In particular, the ground that the applicant does not have
thorough knowledge of Community institutions, programmes
and policies is contested.

In support of his arguments, the applicant claims that this
ground is unfounded, unjustified, illogical and inconsistent.