CELEX: C2004/035/21
Language: en
Date: 2004-02-07 00:00:00
Title: Case T-386/03: Action brought on 24 November 2003 by Deutsche Telekom AG against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

7.2.2004               EN                        Official Journal of the European Union                                           C 35/13
The applicant claims that the Court should:                              Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
                                                                         24 November 2003 by Deutsche Telekom AG, Bonn (Germ-
—     annul the contested decision of the Second Board of                any), represented by D. Marschollek, lawyer. Client Logic
      Appeal of 9 September 2003 (Case R 174/2002-2);                    GmbH & Co. KG, Oberhausen (Germany), was also a party to
                                                                         the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.
—     order the Office to pay the costs.
                                                                         The applicant claims that the Court should:
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for Com-            Biker Miles Motorrad Handels-              —     annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of
munity trade mark:            und Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH                    7 January 2003, notified on 26 September 2003, (Case
                                                                               R 80/2001-4);
Community trade mark          Coloured word/figurative mark
sought:                       ‘BIKER MILES’ for goods in Class-
                                                                         —     order the defendant to pay the costs.
                              es 9 (replacement parts and
                              accessories for two-wheeled
                              vehicles etc.), 12 (motorcycles
                              etc.) and 25 (equipment and cloth-
                              ing for the riders of two-wheeled
                              vehicles etc.) — Application               Pleas in law and main arguments
                              No 1 237 734.
Proprietor of mark or         The applicant
                                                                         Applicant for Com-            The applicant.
sign cited in the oppo-
                                                                         munity trade mark:
sition proceedings:
Mark or sign cited in         The Community trade mark ‘MIL-             Community trade mark          Word mark ‘DTel’ for goods and
opposition.                   ES’ for goods in Class 25.                 sought:                       services in Classes 9 (electric
                                                                                                       apparatus etc.), 37 (construction
Decision of the Oppo-         Refusal to register the mark                                             etc.), 38 (telecommunications
sition Division:              sought.                                                                  etc.) and 42 (computer program-
                                                                                                       ming services etc.) — Application
Decision of the Board of      The appeal was granted and the                                           No 1 176 639.
Appeal:                       opposition rejected.
Pleas in law:                 Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of         Proprietor of mark or         Client Logic GmbH & Co. KG.
                              Regulation No 40/94 (1).                   sign cited in the oppo-
                                                                         sition proceedings:
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the
    Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).                           Mark or sign cited in         The national word mark ‘TETEL’
                                                                         opposition.                   for goods and services in Class-
                                                                                                       es 9, 37, 38 and 42.
                                                                         Decision of the Oppo-         Rejection of the opposition.
                                                                         sition Division:
Action brought on 24 November 2003 by Deutsche
Telekom AG against the Office for Harmonisation in the                   Decision of the Board of      Partial refusal of the application
    Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)                     Appeal:                       to register, in respect of goods
                                                                                                       and services in Class 38. Dismissal
                         (Case T-386/03)                                                               of the remainder of the appeal.
                          (2004/C 35/21)                                 Pleas in law:                 Infringement of Article 8(1)(a) and
                                                                                                       (b) of Regulation No 40/94 (1).
(Language of the case to be determined pursuant to Article 131(2)
of the Rules of Procedure — language in which the application was
                        submitted: German)                               (1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the
                                                                             Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).
An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the