CELEX: C2007/269/115
Language: en
Date: 2007-11-10 00:00:00
Title: Case T-354/07: Action brought on 18 September 2007 — Pfizer v OHIM — Isdin (FOTOPROTECTOR ISDIN)

10.11.2007   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 269/63
            
         Action brought on 18 September 2007 — Pfizer v OHIM — Isdin (FOTOPROTECTOR ISDIN)
   (Case T-354/07)
   (2007/C 269/115)
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   Parties
   
      Applicant: Pfizer Ltd (Sandwich, United Kingdom) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, A. Renck, T. Dolde, lawyers, and M. Hawkins, Solicitor)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Isdin, SA (Barcelona, Spain)
   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 28 June 2007 in Case R 567/2006-1; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the defendant.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   
      Registered Community trade mark subject of the application for a declaration of invalidity: The word mark ‘FOTOPROTECTOR ISDIN’ for products in among others class 5 — Community trade mark No 1 075 597
   
      Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Isdin, SA
   
      Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: The applicant
   
      Trade mark right of the party requesting the declaration of invalidity: The national word mark ‘ISTIN’ for goods in class 5
   
      Decision of the Cancellation Division: Partial declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the Cancellation Division's decision insofar as it declared the invalidity of the Community trade mark
   
      Pleas in law: Violation of the applicant's right to be heard pursuant to Article 73 of Council Regulation No 40/94 and violation of Article 52 read in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of the regulation.