Particularly well-informed medical professionals
Gerecht EU 11 oktober 2011, zaak T-87/10 (Chestnut Medical Technologies, Inc/ OHMI (PIPELINE))
Merkenrecht. Gemeenschapsmerk. Aanvraag Gemeenschapswoordmerk PIPELINE voor een "stent voor behandeling van aneurysma". Absolute weigeringsgrond vanwege beschrijvende karakter van het merk. Diverse bronnen waaronder de betekenis uit de Compact Oxford English Dictionairy van lange pijp voor olie- en gastransport waar de gemiddelde consument deze (merk)naam aan relateert, maar ook Chicago Tribute waaruit volgt dat medische professionals pipeline als beschrijvend ervaren. Gerecht volgt dit laatste, gerichtheid op bepaald goedgeïnformeerde medische professional, en zodoende faalt de klacht, weigering is terecht geweest.
43 In the present case, it should be noted that the Board of Appeal, in paragraph 29 of the contested decision, found that the word ‘pipeline’ contained, at least for the relevant public, that is to say, particularly well-informed medical professionals, obvious and direct information on the kind of goods at issue. It concluded that the mark applied for was descriptive and had therefore to be refused registration, in accordance with Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009. Such a conclusion, based on the analysis of the term as set out in paragraphs 14 to 30 of the contested decision, necessarily renders ineffective the argument that the term ‘catheter’ constitutes a generic name to describe the goods at issue. Indeed, first, the analysis of the Board of Appeal turns on the description of the term ‘pipeline’ in relation to the goods referred to in the application for registration and, second, the existence of another term which may, where appropriate, also designate some or all of those goods is neither such as to call into question the descriptive character of the mark applied for, as established by the Board of Appeal, nor such as to preclude its registration, in accordance with the case-law cited in paragraph 32 above.
Curia: Gemeenschapsmerk – Vernietiging van beslissing R 968/20092 van de tweede kamer van beroep van het Bureau voor harmonisatie binnen de interne markt (BHIM) van 10 december 2009 houdende verwerping van het beroep tegen de weigering van de onderzoeker om het woordmerk „PIPELINE” in te schrijven voor waren van klasse 10.
