Refusal of application for a European Union trade mark

(Article 7 and Article 42(2) EUTMR)

Alicante, 13/12/2019

ADBON LTD, ADBON TRADEMARKS

World Trade Center Helsinki

PB 800

FIN-00101 Helsinki

FINLANDIA

Application No:	018032416
Your reference:
Trade mark:	iNtelligent Air Quality
Mark type:	Word mark
Applicant:	Genano Oy Ab Metsänneidonkuja 6 FI-02130 Espoo FINLANDIA

The Office raised an objection on 24/05/2019 pursuant to Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(2) EUTMR because it found that the trade mark applied for is not eligible for registration, for the reasons set out in the attached letter, which forms an integral part of this decision.

The applicant requested an extension of time to submit observations on 21/07/2019, which was granted. However, the applicant failed to submit any observations within the set time limit.

The Office maintains that the sign applied for ‘iNtelligent Air Quality’ is descriptive pursuant to Article 7(1)(c) and Article 7(2) EUTMR in respect of the goods and services for which protection is sought. When used in conjunction with the goods in classes 9 and 11, the expression ‘iNtelligent Air Quality’ as a whole informs the relevant English-speaking public that the goods are highly developed or ‘intelligent’ goods or systems, or parts thereof, which are capable of acting independently and/or adapting to varying requirements or situations [external stimuli] to modify, for example by improving, the quality or composition air. For example in conjunction with software, the sign informs the consumer that the software enables ‘intelligent’ modification of air quality. In the context of the services in classes 37 and 40, the sign informs that the services relate to goods or systems/solutions for modifying the quality of the air that can be qualified as being ‘intelligent’ (such as construction of buildings that incorporate intelligent air quality modification equipment or solutions), or that the services themselves apply or provide intelligent solutions for modifying air quality (such as intelligent air treatment). Therefore, the sign describes the kind, quality and/or intended purpose of the goods or rendering of the services in question.

Independently of the descriptive character of the sign, the relevant public would also perceive the expression ‘iNtelligent Air Quality’ also as a promotional and laudatory statement. Moreover, in the present case, the relevant public will not tend to perceive in the sign as a whole any particular indication of commercial origin beyond the promotional information conveyed, which merely serves to highlight positive qualities of the goods and services concerned. The message conveyed by the sign is that the goods and services in classes 9, 11, 37 and 40 are goods or services relevant to modification of air quality that can be characterised as intelligent, highly developed and/or add more value or are better/more sophisticated than others in its competitive set.

Consequently, taken as a whole, the sign applied for is descriptive and devoid of any distinctive character, and is not capable of distinguishing the goods and services to which an objection has been raised within the meaning of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(2) EUTMR.

The applicant failed to submit observations within the time limit. Consequently, further argumentation is superfluous. For the reasons set out in the letter of objection, and pursuant to Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(2) EUTMR, the application for European Union trade mark No 018032416 is hereby rejected for all the goods and services claimed

According to Article 67 EUTMR, you have a right to appeal against this decision. According to Article 68 EUTMR, notice of appeal must be filed in writing at the Office within two months of the date of notification of this decision. It must be filed in the language of the proceedings in which the decision subject to appeal was taken. Furthermore, a written statement of the grounds of appeal must be filed within four months of the same date. The notice of appeal will be deemed to be filed only when the appeal fee of EUR 720 has been paid.

Patrik LINDBOHM