CELEX: C2004/217/46
Language: en
Date: 2004-08-28 00:00:00
Title: Case T-204/04: Action brought on 7 June 2004 by Indorata-Servicos e Gestao Lda against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

28.8.2004   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 217/25
            
         Action brought on 7 June 2004 by Indorata-Servicos e Gestao Lda against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
   (Case T-204/04)
   (2004/C 217/46)
   Language of the case: German
   An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 7 June 2004 by Indorata-Servicos e Gestao Lda, represented by T Wallentin, lawyer.
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the contested rejection of its application for a Community trade mark and order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to register the sign ‘HAIRTRANSFER’ as a Community trade mark for the remaining goods and services which remain the subject of dispute also and to publish that registration;
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments:
   
               Community trade mark sought:
            
            
               The word mark ‘HAIRTRANSFER’ — Application No 2 619 039.
            
         
               Goods or services:
            
            
               Goods and services in Classes 8, 22, 41 and 44 (inter alia, electric and non-electric depilation appliances, artificial and real hair, provision of training, in particular arranging and conducting of further-training seminars and hygienic and beauty care, in particular hair care and treatment).
            
         
               Decision contested before the Board of Appeal:
            
            
               Refusal to register by the examiner.
            
         
               Decision of the Board of Appeal:
            
            
               Dismissal of the appeal.
            
         
               Pleas in law:
            
            
               The mark sought is distinctive within the meaning of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94;
               The mark sought is not exclusively descriptive within the meaning of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.