Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 10 February 2015 —
IOIP Holdings v OHIM (GLISTEN)
(Case T‑648/13)
Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark GLISTEN — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
1. Community trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Direction issued to the Office — Not included (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65(6)) (see para. 9)
2. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service — Aim — Need to preserve availability (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see para. 14)
3. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service — Concept (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see paras 15, 16)
4. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service — Assessment of the descriptive nature of a sign — Criteria (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see para. 17)
5. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications which may serve to designate the characteristics of goods — Word mark GLISTEN (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see paras 18-20, 24)
6. Community trade mark — Decisions of the Office — Principle of equal treatment — Principle of sound administration — OHIM’s previous decision-making practice — Principle of legality (see para. 27)
7. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Assessment of the registrability of a sign — EU rules only taken into account — Earlier registration of the mark in certain Member States or third countries — Decisions not binding EU bodies (Council Regulation No 207/2009; Council Directive No 89/104) (see para. 31)
Re:
| ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 September 2013 (Case R 1028/2013-2), concerning an application for registration of the word sign GLISTEN as a Community trade mark. |
Operative part
The Court:
2. | | Orders IOIP Holdings LLC to pay the costs. |