For the half-year to 30 June 2014, the IPKat's regular team is supplemented by contributions from guest bloggers Alberto Bellan, Darren Meale and Nadia Zegze.

Two of our regular Kats are currently on blogging sabbaticals. They are David Brophy and Catherine Lee.

Thursday, 8 November 2007

Community trade marks and the gift of tongues

The Court of First Instance ruled this morning (in French only, again) in l’affaire T‑169/06, Charlott SARL v OHIM, Charlo – Confecções para Homens, Artigos de Lã e Outros SA. Charlott applied to register the figurative mark on the right as a Community trade mark for lingerie and other items of intimate apparel in Class 25. Charlot opposed, citing an earlier Portuguese registration of the Charlot mark (below) for des vêtements (clothes) in Class 25 and claiming a likelihood of confusion based on similar marks/goods. The IPKat thinks there was
some issue as to whether, and for what goods, Charlo's mark was used. The Opposition Division rejected the opposition but the Board of Appeal took a different view. At this point the IPKat feels he's way out of his depth and really looks forward to hearing from one or more of his French-speaking readers (please post comments below or email the IPKat here). He can say with confidence, though, that Charlott lost. Merpel adds, this is a 66 paragraph job, so either there's lots of law in the decision or, er ... not.


Meanwhile, both in French and German, is Rechtssache T‑459/05 MPDV Mikrolab GmbH, Mikroprozessordatenverarbeitung und Mikroprozessorlabor v Harmonisierungsamt für den Binnenmarkt (Marken, Muster und Modelle) (HABM). This is an application for annulment of decision R 1059/2004-2 of the Second Board of Appeal, which dismissed the appeal against the examiner's decision to refuse to register the word mark 'manufacturing score card' for goods and services in Classes 9, 35 and 42. Well, as we linguistically talented Kittens say, "Die Klage wird abgewiesen" - which (we think) means "the complaint is dismissed". Once again, help!

4 comments:

Birgit said...

Confirming:

"Die Klage wird abgewiesen" (GER)
translates into:
"The claim/case/action is dismissed". (ENG)

Birgit said...

PS: I had a look at the decision "Nach alledem ist die Klage in vollem Umfang abzuweisen.

Dismisse in its entirety, both grounds dismissed.

Anonymous said...

Most of the Charlot case actually discusses in a lot of detail whether the use of the TM charlot was a "serious use". It gives a series of criteria that need to be taken into accout when deciding if there is serious use.

Jeremy said...

Tibor Gold's take on Charlot: "A very fact-specific case about the sufficiency of proof of genuine use in an opposition. The O.D. said 'no', the BoA said 'yes' and the CFI upheld the BoA. There is nothing more to it". And on 'manufacturing score card he says "just as the sign 'manufacturing score card' is devoid of distinctive character and, above all, descriptive, so too is the case devoid of legal interest. Tired old arguments about the same mark having been accepted in EU member states and analogous cases having been accepted at OHIM have all been rejected on the usual basis of autonomous assessment and not being bound by precedent. When will the tide of utterly hopeless appeals stop? I am beginning to feel sorry for the judges of the CFI ...".

Subscribe to the IPKat's posts by email here

Just pop your email address into the box and click 'Subscribe':