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
Community trade mark – Applications for Community word marks CYBERCREDIT, CYBERGESTION, CYBERGUICHET, CYBERBOURSE and CYBERHOME – Absolute ground for refusal – Lack of distinctive character – Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Lack of distinctive character acquired through use – Article 7(3) of Regulation No 40/94
Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks devoid of any distinctive character (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see paras 32-36, 42)
Re:
ACTIONS brought against the decisions of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 24 May (Case R 0068/2006-1), 12 June (Case R 0066/2006‑1), 5 July 2006 (Case R 0067/2006-1), 28 February (Case R 1046/2006‑1) and 15 March 2007 (Case R 0067/2006‑1), concerning registration of the signs CYBERGESTION (Case T‑213/06), CYBERCREDIT (Case T‑211/06), CYBERGUICHET (Case T‑245/06), CYBERBOURSE (Case T‑155/07) and CYBERHOME (Case T‑178/07) as Community trade marks.
Applicant for the Community trade marks:
Européenne de traitement de l’information (Euro-Information)
Community trade marks concerned:
Word marks CYBERCREDIT, CYBERGESTION, CYBERGUICHET, CYBERBOURSE and CYBERHOME in respect of goods and services in Classes 9, 36 and 38 (Application Nos 4114336, 4114716, 4114575, 4114682 and 4114666)
Decision of the examiner:
Registrations refused
Decision of the Board of Appeal:
Appeals dismissed
The Court:
1.Dismisses the actions;
2.Orders Européenne de traitement de l’information (Euro-Information) to pay the costs.