CELEX: C2000/192/39
Language: en
Date: 2000-07-08 00:00:00
Title: Case T-118/00: Action brought on 3 May 2000 by The Procter & Gamble Company against the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market.

8.7.2000              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                     C 192/21
Action brought on 3 May 2000 by The Procter & Gamble                    European Communities on 3 May 2000 by The Procter &
Company against the Office for Harmonization in the                     Gamble Company, represented by C.J.J.C. van Nispen and
                        Internal Market.                                G. Kuipers of De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek, The Hague,
                                                                        Netherlands.
                        (Case T-117/00)
                                                                        The applicant claims that the Court should:
                        (2000/C 192/38)
                                                                        — annul Decision R516/1999-1 of the First Board of Appeal
                                                                            of the OHIM of 3 March 2000, in so far as it finds that the
                  (Language of the case: English)                           Mark does not satisfy the conditions as laid down in
                                                                            Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94; and
An action against the Office for Harmonization in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the            — order the OHIM to pay the costs.
European Communities on 3 May 2000 by The Procter &
Gamble Company, represented by C.J.J.C. van Nispen and
                                                                        Pleas in law and main arguments
G. Kuipers of De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek, The Hague,
Netherlands.
                                                                        Trademark concerned:          Three dimensional trademark in
                                                                                                      the form of tablets — Application
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                                                      No 954404
— annul Decision R509/1999-1 of the First Board of Appeal               Product or Service:           Products in Class 3 of the Nice
    of the OHIM of 8 March 2000, in so far as it finds that the                                       Agreement (in particular, washing
    Mark does not satisfy the conditions as laid down in                                              and bleaching preparations for
    Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94; and                                                       laundry use; preparations for the
                                                                                                      washing of dishes, soaps)
— order the OHIM to pay the costs.
                                                                        Contested        decision     Refusal of registration by the
Pleas in law and main arguments                                         before the Board of           examiner
                                                                        Appeal:
Trademark concerned:          Three dimensional trademark in            Grounds for appeal:           Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of
                              the form of tablets — Application                                       Regulation 40/94.
                              No 954099
Product or Service:           Products in Class 3 of the Nice
                              Agreement (in particular, washing
                              and bleaching preparations for
                              laundry use; preparations for the
                              washing of dishes, soaps)
                                                                        Action brought on 3 May 2000 by The Procter & Gamble
Contested        decision     Refusal of registration by the            Company against the Office for Harmonization in the
before the Board of           examiner                                                          Internal Market.
Appeal:
                                                                                                (Case T-119/00)
Grounds for appeal:           Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of
                              Regulation 40/94.                                                 (2000/C 192/40)
                                                                                          (Language of the case: English)
                                                                        An action against the Office for Harmonization in the Internal
                                                                        Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
Action brought on 3 May 2000 by The Procter & Gamble                    European Communities on 3 May 2000 by The Procter &
Company against the Office for Harmonization in the                     Gamble Company, represented by C.J.J.C. van Nispen and
                        Internal Market                                 G. Kuipers of De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek, The Hague,
                                                                        Netherlands.
                        (Case T-118/00)
                                                                        The applicant claims that the Court should:
                        (2000/C 192/39)
                                                                        — annul Decision R519/1999-1 of the First Board of Appeal
                                                                            of the OHIM of 29 February 2000, in so far as it finds that
                  (Language of the case: English)                           the Mark does not satisfy the conditions as laid down in
                                                                            Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94; and
An action against the Office for Harmonization in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the            — order the OHIM to pay the costs.