CELEX: 62008TA0200
Language: en
Date: 2010-09-29 00:00:00
Title: Case T-200/08: Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2010 — Interflon v OHIM — Illinois Tool Works (FOODLUBE) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community trade mark FOODLUBE — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptiveness — Distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

20.11.2010   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 317/26
            
         Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2010 — Interflon v OHIM — Illinois Tool Works (FOODLUBE)
   (Case T-200/08) (1)
   
   (Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community trade mark FOODLUBE - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptiveness - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
   2010/C 317/46
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Interflon BV (Rosendaal, Netherlands) (represented by: S. Wertwijn, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Novais Gonçalves, Agent)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Illinois Tool Works, Inc. (Glenview, Illinois, United States)
   
      Re:
   
   Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 March 2008 (Case R 638/2007-2) concerning invalidity proceedings between Interflon BV and Illinois Tool Works, Inc.
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 3 March 2008 (Case R 638/2007-2) in so far as it dismisses the appeal with regard to chemicals used in industry in Class 1, and industrial oils and greases and lubricants in Class 4;
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Dismisses the action as to the remainder;
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Orders each party to bear its own costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 183, 19.7.2008.