CELEX: 62012TA0273
Language: en
Date: 2014-06-24 00:00:00
Title: Case T-273/12: Judgment of the General Court of 24 June 2014  — Unister v OHIM (Ab in den Urlaub) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark Ab in den Urlaub — Mark consisting of an advertising slogan — Absolute ground for refusal — Absence of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Absence of evidence of distinctive character acquired through use — Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009)

4.8.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 253/25
            
         Judgment of the General Court of 24 June 2014 — Unister v OHIM (Ab in den Urlaub)
   (Case T-273/12) (1)
   
   ((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark Ab in den Urlaub - Mark consisting of an advertising slogan - Absolute ground for refusal - Absence of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Absence of evidence of distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009))
   2014/C 253/35
   Language of the case: German
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Unister GmbH (Leipzig, Germany) (represented by: H. Hug and A. Kessler-Jensch, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Walicka and R. Pethke, acting as Agents)
   
      Re:
   
   Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 3 April 2012 (Case R 2150/2011-1), concerning an application for registration of the word mark Ab in den Urlaub as a Community trade mark.
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   The Court:
   
               1)
            
            
               Dismisses the action;
            
         
               2)
            
            
               Orders Unister GmbH to pay the costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 243, 11.8.2012.