I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
(Case T-435/05)(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark Dr. No - Opposition by the proprietor of the non-registered word marks and signs Dr. No and Dr. NO - Failure to satisfy the requirement for earlier marks - Lack of a distinctive sign used in the course of trade - Article 8(1)(a) and (b), (2)(c) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(a) and (b), (2)(c) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Obligation to state reasons - Article 73 of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 75 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2009/C 193/22
Language of the case: English
Applicant: Danjaq LLC (Santa Monica, California, United States) (represented by: G. Hobbs QC, G. Hollingworth, Barrister, S. Skrein and L. Berg, Solicitors)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard Monguiral, Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the Court of First Instance: Mission Productions Gesellschaft für Film-, Fernseh- und Veranstaltungsproduktion mbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: K. Lewinsky, lawyer)
Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 21 September 2005 (Case R 1118/2004-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Danjaq LLC and Mission Productions Gesellschaft für Film-, Fernseh- und Veranstaltungsproduktion mbH
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action.
2.Orders Danjaq LLC to pay the costs.
(1) OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.