Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62010TN0013

Case T-13/10: Action brought on 20 January 2010 — Klaus Goutier v OHIM — Rauch (ARANTAX)

IO C 80, 27.3.2010, p. 35–35 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

27.3.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 80/35


Action brought on 20 January 2010 — Klaus Goutier v OHIM — Rauch (ARANTAX)

(Case T-13/10)

2010/C 80/58

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Klaus Goutier (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: E.E. Happe, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Norbert Rauch (Herzogenaurach, Germany)

Form of order sought

Annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 10 November 2009 (in Case R 1769/2008-4) in so far as the application for a Community mark annulling the contested decision was rejected for the following services:

Class 35 — Tax consultancy, tax preparation, accounting, auditing, professional business consultancy, business consultancy;

Class 36 — Fiscal assessments, mergers and acquisitions, namely financial consultancy with regard to the purchase or sale of companies and company shares, financial management;

Class 43 — Provision of legal services, legal research;

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Klaus Goutier

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘ARANTAX’ for services in Classes 35, 36 and 42 (Application No 4 823 084)

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Norbert Rauch

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the German word mark ‘atarax’ No 30 168 707 for goods and services in Classes 9, 35, 37, 41 and 42

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Partial annulment of the Opposition Division’s decision and partial rejection of the Community trade mark application

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, (1) owing to the absence of likelihood of confusion of the marks at issue


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).


Top
  翻译: