CELEX: C2003/019/58
Language: en
Date: 2003-01-25 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 20 November 2002 in Joined Cases T-79/01 and T-86/01: Robert Bosch GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Community trade mark — Kit Pro and Kit Super Pro — Absolute grounds for refusal — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

25.1.2003                EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                        C 19/31
the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in                      Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) being ELS                     and Designs) of 31 October 2000 (Joined Cases R 728/1999-
Educational Services, Inc., established in Culver City, California          2 and R 792/1999-2), relating to opposition proceedings
(United States): Action brought against the decision of the                 between Hukla Germany SA and Matratzen Concord GmbH,
Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the                the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed
Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 18 October                     of: M. Vilaras, President, V. Tiili and P. Mengozzi, Judges;
2000 (Case R 074/2000-3), the Court of First Instance (Fourth               D. Christensen, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a
Chamber), composed of: M. Vilaras, President, V. Tiili and                  judgment on 23 October 2002, in which it:
P. Mengozzi, Judges; D. Christensen, Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 23 October 2002, in which
it:                                                                         1.     Dismisses the application;
1.     Annuls the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office       2.     Orders the applicant to pay the costs.
       for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
       Designs) (OHIM) of 18 October 2000 (Case R 074/2000-
       3) in so far as it relates to the analysis of the likelihood of
                                                                            (1 ) OJ C 108 of 7.4.2001.
       confusion between the conflicting marks;
2.     For the rest, dismisses the application;
3.     Orders the defendant to bear its own costs and pay two thirds
       of the costs incurred by the applicant. The applicant shall bear
       one third of its own costs.
( 1) OJ C 79 of 10.3.2001.
                                                                                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                                                                                                  of 20 November 2002
                                                                            in Joined Cases T-79/01 and T-86/01: Robert Bosch GmbH
     JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                                v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade
                                                                                             Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (1)
                         of 23 October 2002
                                                                            (Community trade mark — Kit Pro and Kit Super Pro —
in Case T-6/01: Matratzen Concord GmbH v Office for                         Absolute grounds for refusal — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation
Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and                                                  (EC) No 40/94)
                         Designs) (OHIM) ( 1)
                                                                                                       (2003/C 19/58)
(Community trade mark — Opposition — Relative grounds
for refusal — Similarity between two trade marks —
Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation                                        (Language of the case: German)
(EC) No 40/94 — Application for a figurative Community
trade mark containing the word ‘Matratzen’ — Earlier word
                     trade mark MATRATZEN)
                            (2003/C 19/57)                                  In Joined Cases T-79/01 and T-86/01, Robert Bosch GmbH,
                                                                            established in Stuttgart (Germany), represented by S. Völker,
                                                                            lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg, v Com-
                     (Language of the case: German)                         mission of the European Communities (Agent: G. Schneider):
                                                                            Actions brought against two decisions of the First Board of
                                                                            Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
                                                                            (Trade Marks and Designs) of 31 January 2001 (Cases R 124/
In Case T-6/01, Matratzen Concord GmbH, formerly Matratzen                  2000-1 and R 123/2000-1) on the registration of Kit Pro and
Concord AG, established in Cologne (Germany), represented                   Kit Super Pro respectively as Community trade marks, the
by W.-W. Wodrich, avocat, v Office for Harmonisation in the                 Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of:
Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents:                   M. Vilaras, President, V. Tiili and P. Mengozzi, Judges; D. Chris-
A. von Mühlendahl, G. Schneider and E. Joly): Action brought                tensen, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment
against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the                   on 20 November 2002, in which it:
 ---pagebreak--- C 19/32                  EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                     25.1.2003
1.     Dismisses the applications;                                               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
2.     Orders the applicant to pay the costs.                                                       of 23 October 2002
                                                                            in Case T-104/01: Claudia Oberhauser v Office for Har-
( 1) OJ C 186 of 30.6.2001.                                                 monisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
                                                                                                    Designs) (OHIM) ( 1)
                                                                            (Community trade mark — Opposition — Earlier figurative
                                                                            mark containing the term ‘miss fifties’ — Application for
                                                                            Community word mark ‘Fifties’ — Relative ground for
                                                                            refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of
                                                                                                Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
     JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                                                                                                       (2003/C 19/60)
                       of 26 November 2002                                                     (Language of the case: German)
in Case T-103/01: Michael Cwik v Commission of the
                                                                            In Case T-104/01, Claudia Oberhauser, established in Munich
                    European Communities ( 1)
                                                                            (Germany), represented by M. Graf, lawyer, v Office for
                                                                            Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
(Officials — Reorganisation of the Commission’s adminis-                    Designs) (OHIM) (Agent: G. Schneider), the other party to the
trative structures — Redeployment — Reasons — Interest                      proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office for
       of the service — Misuse of power — Duty of care)                     Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
                                                                            Designs) being Petit Liberto, SA, established in Vidreres (Spain):
                                                                            Action brought against the decision of the Second Chamber
                           (2003/C 19/59)                                   Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the
                                                                            Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 28 February
                                                                            2001 (Case R 757/1999-2), the Court of First Instance (Fourth
                     (Language of the case: French)
                                                                            Chamber), composed of: M. Vilaras, President, V. Tiili and
                                                                            P. Mengozzi, Judges; D. Christensen, Administrator, for the
                                                                            Registrar, has given a judgment on 23 October 2002, in which
                                                                            it:
In Case T-103/01: Michael Cwik, an official of the Commission
of the European Communities, residing in Tervuren (Belgium),                1.     Dismisses the application;
represented by N. Lhoëst, avocat, with an address for service
in Luxembourg, against Commission of the European Com-                      2.     Orders the applicant to pay the costs.
munities (Agents: J. Currall, D. Waelbroeck and J. Waldron) —
application, in the first place, for annulment of the Commission
                                                                            (1 ) OJ C 227 of 11.8.2001.
decision transferring the applicant from the ‘Economic Infor-
mation, Publications and Documentation’ Unit, which first
became the ‘Information: EURO, EMU’ Unit and subsequently
became Unit 4 ‘Communications Policy in regard to Monetary
Union’, to the ‘General Coordination, Human Resources and
Administration’ Unit, which became Unit 1 ‘Human Resources
Coordination; Information and Administration’, within the                        JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
‘Economic and Financial Affairs’ Directorate-General, and,
second, for compensation — the Court of First Instance                                             of 7 November 2002
(Second Chamber), composed of: R.M. Moura Ramos, Presi-
dent, J. Pirrung and A.W.H. Meij, Judges; D. Christensen,                   in Case T-199/01: G v Commission of the European
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on                                             Communities ( 1)
26 November 2002, the operative part of which is as follows:
                                                                            (Officials — Social security — Refusal to reimburse medical
                                                                                           expenses — Inefficacious treatment)
1.     The application is dismissed;
                                                                                                       (2003/C 19/61)
2.     The parties shall bear their own costs.
                                                                                                (Language of the case: French)
( 1) OJ C 227 of 11.08.2001.
                                                                            In Case T-199/01: G, an official of the Commission of the
                                                                            European Communities, residing in Ispra (Italy), represented by