Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 17January 2013— Abbott Laboratories v OHIM
(Case C‑21/12 P)
Appeal — Community trade mark — Word mark ‘RESTORE’ — Refusal to register — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Lack of distinctiveness — Right to be heard — Regulation (EC) No207/2009 — Articles7 (1)(b) and (c) and 75, second sentence — Equal treatment
1.Appeals — Grounds — Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 53)
2.Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Assessment in relation to the products and services in respect of which registration is sought (Council Regulation No207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see para. 69)
3.Appeals — Grounds — Mere repetition of the pleas and arguments put forward before the General Court — Error of law relied on not identified — Not admissible (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 112(1)(c)) (see paras 84, 85)
4.Appeals — Grounds — Challenge of the decision contested before the General Court and not of the judgment of the latter — Not admissible (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 112(1)(c)) (see para. 86)
Re:
| Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 15November 2011 in Case T‑363/10 | Abbott Laboratories | v | OHIM | , by which the General Court dismissed the appellant’s action against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9June 2010 (Case R 1560/2009-1), concerning an application for registration of the word mark RESTORE as a Community trade mark— Infringement of Article7(1)(b) and (c) and of Article75 of Council Regulation (EC) No207/2009 of 26February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L78, p.1)— Distinctiveness of the word mark RESTORE. |
Operative part
1. |
| The appeal is dismissed. |
2. |
| Abbott Laboratories is ordered to pay the costs. |