CELEX: C2004/021/89
Language: en
Date: 2004-01-24 00:00:00
Title: Case T-387/03: Action brought on 25 November 2003 by Proteome, Inc against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

C 21/44                 EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                       24.1.2004
Finally, the applicant submits that in calculating the                      Pleas in law and main arguments
countervailing duty, the defendant infringed Articles 5 and 7
of Regulation 2026/97, the Guidelines on the calculation of
the amount of the subsidy in countervailing duty proceedings,               Applicant for regis-         Europortal Italia SpA, succeeded
Articles 14 and 19 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and                    tration of the Com-          by the applicant.
Countervailing Measures, and committed a manifest error of                  munity trade mark:
assessment.
                                                                            Community trade mark         Word mark ‘Jumpy’ — regis-
                                                                            sought:                      tration application No 1.332.006,
(1) OJ L 212 of 22 August 2003, p. 1.                                                                    registration sought in respect of a
(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 2026/97 of 6 October 1997 on                                              number of goods in Classes 9 and
    protection against subsidized imports from countries not mem-
    bers of the European Community (OJ L 288, p. 1).
                                                                                                         16.
(3) See recital 48 and following of the contested decision.
                                                                            Proprietor of mark or        Microarea SpA.
                                                                            sign cited in the oppo-
                                                                            sition proceedings:
                                                                            Mark or sign cited in        Italian word mark ‘Jump’ for
                                                                            opposition:                  goods in Classes 9 and 16.
                                                                            Decision of the Oppo-        Opposition upheld and appli-
Action brought on 17 November 2003 by Reti Televisive                       sition Division:             cation rejected.
Italiane — RTI against the Office for Harmonisation in
  the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
                                                                            Decision of the Board of     Appeal dismissed.
                                                                            Appeal:
                           (Case T-384/03)
                                                                            Pleas in law:                Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b)
                                                                                                         of Regulation No 40/94 (‘likeli-
                            (2004/C 21/88)                                                               hood of confusion’).
                    (Language of the case: Italian)
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
17 November 2003 by Reti Televisive Italiane — RTI, rep-                    Action brought on 25 November 2003 by Proteome, Inc
resented by Giorgio Floridia and Raffaella Floridia, lawyers.               against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
                                                                                     Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Microarea SpA was also a party to the proceedings before the
Board of Appeal.                                                                                    (Case T-387/03)
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                                          (2004/C 21/89)
—     annul the decision of 11 September 2003 of the First
      Board of Appeal; or                                                                     (Language of the case: English)
—     in the alternative, interpret the decision of the Opposition
      Division No 2637/2002 of 30 August 2002 on Oppo-
      sition No B321994 to the effect that it does not preclude             An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
      the valid registration of the trade mark ‘Jumpy’ to                   Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
      distinguish it from the similarly-named Internet portal;              the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
                                                                            25 November 2003 by Proteome, Inc., Beverley, Massachu-
—     make an order pursuant to Article 87(2) of the Rules of               setts, USA, represented by Dr Michael Edenborough, Barrister,
      Procedure requiring the defendant, as the unsuccessful                Mr Cerryg Jones, Ms Alexandra Brodie and Ms Carina Loweth
      party, to pay the costs.                                              Solicitors.
 ---pagebreak--- 24.1.2004              EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                            C 21/45
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
                                                                           24 November 2003 by Dainichiseika Colour & Chemicals Mfg.
—     Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of                  Co. Ltd., Tokyo (Japan), represented by J. Hofmann, lawyer.
      the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market                  Pelikan Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG was also a party
      (Trademarks and Designs) No $ 0707/2002-4;                           to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.
—     Annul the decision of the Examination Division dated the
      21st June 2002
                                                                           The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     Remit Community trade mark application No 1 544 766
      to the Office so as to allow the said application to proceed         —     annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of
      to advertisement                                                           18 September 2003 (Case R 191/2002-2);
—     order the Office to pay the applicant’s costs incurred by
      the applicant in connection with this appeal and the                 —     reject the opposition in its entirety;
      appeal before the Board of Appeal and the prosecution
      before the Examination Division.                                     —     hold that the sign sought in Community trade mark
                                                                                 application No 1 005 826 may be registered as a
                                                                                 Community trade mark in respect of all the goods in
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                  Classes 1, 2 and 17 claimed in that application of
                                                                                 25 November 1998;
Applicant for Com-              Proteome, Inc.
munity trade mark:                                                         —     order the opponent to pay all the costs incurred by the
                                                                                 applicant in the opposition and appeal proceedings;
Community trade mark            Word mark ‘BIOKNOWLEDGE’
sought:                         for certain goods and services
                                in Classes 9 (databases etc.), 16          —     order the opponent to pay the costs of the present
                                (printed material etc concerning                 proceedings.
                                repositories of information relat-
                                ing to organisms) and 42 (infor-
                                mation and computer services
                                etc.) (application No 1544766).            Pleas in law and main arguments
Decision of the Examin-         Registration refused.
ation Division:                                                            Applicant for Com-            The applicant.
Decision of the Board of        Appeal rejected.                           munity trade mark:
Appeal:
                                                                           Community trade mark          Figurative mark for goods in
Pleas in law:                   Misapplication of Article 7(1) (b)         sought:                       Classes 1 (chemicals etc.), 2 (dye-
                                and (c) of Regulation 40/94 (1).                                         stuffs etc.) and 17 (plastics etc.) —
                                                                                                         Application No 1 005 826.
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the
    Community trade mark (OJ 11, p. 1).                                    Proprietor of mark or         Pelikan Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH
                                                                           sign cited in the oppo-       & Co. KG.
                                                                           sition proceedings:
                                                                           Mark or sign cited in         Community and national trade
                                                                           opposition:                   mark ‘Pelikan’.
Action brought on 24 November 2003 by Dainichiseika
Colour & Chemicals Mfg. Co. Ltd. against the Office for                    Decision of the Oppo-         Refusal of the application.
Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and                      sition Division:
                              Designs)
                                                                           Decision of the Board of      Dismissal      of  the    applicant’s
                         (Case T-389/03)                                   Appeal:                       appeal.
                          (2004/C 21/90)                                   Pleas in law:                 Infringement of Article 8(1)(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