You are on page 1of 1

5.3.

2005 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 57/31

The applicant claims that the Court should: Grounds: The decision of the Board of
Appeal infringed Article 8(1)(b) of
Regulation (EC) No 40/94,
— set aside the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the because the Board made an incor-
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade rect assessment of the require-
Marks and Designs) of 6 September 2004 (Case R65/2003- ments for the existence of a risk of
4) in so far as it allowed the appeal of the opposing party confusion in trade mark law. In
in respect of the goods submitted for Community registra- the applicant's submission, there is
tion: ‘Apparatus for recording, transmission or reproduction no such risk of confusion between
of images, sound and data; electrotechnical and electronic the marks being compared in this
apparatus and systems composed thereof for the remote case.
control of industrial processes; all such above-mentioned
goods being also capable of installation in vehicles;
programmed machine-readable data carriers of all kinds’.

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments


Action brought on 9 December 2004 by François Pilat
against the Council of the European Union and the
Commission of the European Communities
Applicant for the Com- The applicant
munity mark: (Case T-484/04)

Community mark The pictorial mark ‘@k’ for goods (2005/C 57/53)
submitted for registra- and services in Classes 9, 16, 35,
tion: 37, 38 and 42 (Application No (Language of the case: French)
1322460)

Proprietor of the rival Anders + Kern Präsentationssys- An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
mark or design cited in teme GmbH & Co. KG. nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
the opposition proce- European Communities on 9 December 2004 by François Pilat,
dure: residing in Honfleur (France), represented by Jean-François Péri-
caud, lawyer.

Mark or design cited in The Community pictorial mark The applicant claims that the Court should:
opposition: 'A+K' for goods and services in
Classes 6, 9 and 20 (Community — order the Council of the European Union and the Commis-
Mark No 294 546). sion of the European Communities jointly and severally to
pay the applicant the sum of EUR 377 253, alternatively
the sum of EUR 325 579, together, in either event, with
interest from the date when this application was brought;
Decision of the Opposi- Dismissal of the Opposition.
tion Division:
— order the Council of the European Union and the Commis-
sion of the European Communities jointly and severally to
pay the costs.
Decision of the Board Appeal by Anders+Kern Präsenta-
of Appeal: tionssysteme GmbH & Co. KG
allowed in so far as it related to
Pleas in law and main arguments
‘Apparatus for recording, transmis-
sion or reproduction of images,
sound and data; electrotechnical The pleas in law and main arguments raised by the applicant
and electronic apparatus and are the same as those raised by the applicants in Case T-440/
systems composed thereof for the 03 (1) Arizmendi and Others v Council and Commission.
remote control of industrial
processes; all such above-
mentioned goods being also
capable of installation in vehicles; (1) OJEU C 59, of 06.03.2004, p. 31.
programmed machine-readable
data carriers of all kinds’. Other-
wise, appeal dismissed.