Gepubliceerd op woensdag 15 juni 2016
IEF 16029
Gerecht EU (voorheen GvEA) ||
14 jun 2016
Gerecht EU (voorheen GvEA) 14 jun 2016, IEF 16029; ECLI:EU:T:2016:348 (haltervormige tandenborstel), https://ie-forum.nl/artikelen/barbell-gevormde-tandenborstel-mist-onderscheidend-vermogen

Barbell-gevormde tandenborstel mist onderscheidend vermogen

Gerecht EU 14 juni 2016, IEF 16029; T‑385/15; ECLI:EU:T:2016:348 (haltervormige tandenborstel)
EU 3D-vormmerk. EUIPO heeft het EU-3D-vormmerk voor de vorm van een halter (barbell) gevormde tandenborstel geweigerd vanwege ontbreken van onderscheidend karakter. De barbell-vorm was slechts decoratief en een variatie op tandenborstels waarbij de 'bumps' gripbevorderend werken. De gevraagde voorziening wordt geweigerd.

5. (...) In particular, he considered that the ‘barbell’ shape was merely decorative and was a mere variation on a common theme used on many toothbrush handles, which have ‘bumps’ which serve, in particular, to improve the grip.

36. In the present case, it is apparent from the contested decision that the Board of Appeal performed a full and specific examination of the trade mark applied for before refusing to register it. In addition, it is apparent from the examination of the applicant’s other claims that that examination led the Board of Appeal to find, correctly, that the absolute ground for refusal to register referred to in Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 existed and thus precluded registration of the trade mark applied for. Since the examination of the trade mark at issue in the light of that provision could not, in itself, lead to a different conclusion, the applicant’s claims of a failure to take into consideration the registration of other marks cannot succeed. The applicant may thus not rely on previous EUIPO decisions in order to cast doubt on the conclusion that the registration of the mark applied for is incompatible with Regulation No 207/2009.