Language of document :

Notice for the OJ

 

SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1

Action brought on 20 February 2004 by Anheuser-Busch, Incorporated against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-71/04)

Language of the case:

        to be determined pursuant to article 131(2) of the Rules of Procedure

     - language in which the case was submitted: English

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 20 February 2004 by Anheuser-Busch, Incorporated, St. Louis, Missouri, USA , represented by Dr V.von Bomhard, Dr A. Renck and Dr A. Pohlmann, lawyers.

Budejovicky Budvar, narodni podnik was a further party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

-     annul Decision R 1000/2001-2 of 3 December 2003 of the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) inasmuch as it rejected the contested mark "AB GENUINE BUDWEISER KING OF BEERS" for goods in Class 32

-     order the cost of proceedings to be borne by the defendant

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Applicant for Community trade mark:        Anheuser-Busch Inc.

Community trade mark sought:            Figurative mark "AB GENUINE BUDWEISER KING OF BEERS"for goods in class 32 (beer etc.)

Proprietor of mark or sign cited in             Budejovicky Budvar

the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition:            Word national mark "BUDWEISER"

Decision of the Opposition Division:        Registration refused

Decision of the Board of Appeal:            Appeal rejected

Pleas in law:                        

Infringement of Articles 42 (2), (3) of Regulation 40/941. In the context of this plea, the applicant contends that the proof of use submitted by the opponent was insufficient to sustain genuine use. Infringement of Article 8 (1) (b) of Regulation 40/941.In this context, the applicant submits that there is no likelihood of confusion between the marks in question.

____________

1 - Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 993 on the Community trade mark (OJ , p. )