8.9.2007   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/45


Action brought on 6 July 2007 — Weiler v OHIM — CISQ (Q2WEB)

(Case T-242/07)

(2007/C 211/83)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Dieter Weiler (Pulheim, Germany) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, T. Dolde and A. Renck, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: CISQ Federazione Certificazione Italiana Sistemi di Qualità Aziendali

Form of order sought

annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 29 March 2007 in Case R 893/2005-1, and

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings, but with regard to the intervention of the other party before the Board of Appeal, the defendant and the intervener should be ordered to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought:‘Q2WEB’ for goods and services in classes 9, 35, 38 and 42 (Community trade mark No 2 418 150)

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: the Applicant

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: CISQ Federazione Certificazione Italiana Sistemi di Qualità Aziendali

Trade mark right of applicant for the declaration: the word mark ‘QWEB’ for services in class 42 (Community trade mark No 1 772 078), the figurative mark ‘QWEB’ for services in classes 35, 38 and 42 (Community trade mark No 1 871 201), and the word mark ‘QWEBMARK’ for services in classes 35, 38 and 42 (Community trade mark No 1 771 963)

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Declaration of the invalidity of the trade mark concerned

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 52(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1), since the opposing trade marks are not visually, phonetically or conceptually similar and the differences between the marks are sufficient to rule out the risk of confusion on the part of relevant consumers.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994, L 11, p. 1).