Refusal of application for a European Union trade mark

(Article 7 and Article 42(2) EUTMR)

Alicante, 26/10/2020

Manuel DE ARPE TEJERO

Calle Islas de Cabo Verde 86 1º

E-28035 Madrid

ESPAÑA

Application No:	018236400
Your reference:
Trade mark:
Mark type:	Figurative mark
Applicant:	Shenzhen 75 Plus Biological Technology Co., Ltd. 17B, Taibang Technology Building, Yuehai Street, Nanshan District Shenzhen REPÚBLICA POPULAR DE CHINA

The Office raised an objection on 26/06/2020 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.

In summary, the Office found that the relevant consumers would perceive the sign as providing information that the goods in class 3 and class 5 applied for have cleansing properties of 75% and above. Therefore, the sign describes the kind and quality of the goods in question. The number merely describes a characteristic of the goods, being that they have a ‘tfm’ (total fatty matter) of 75% and above which means that the goods are of higher quality and provide a better, more efficient cleaning solution, taking care of the skin; it also provides a percentage of its disinfectant protection which can be found in the market for the goods applied for. In the case at hand, the relevant consumer would, without further thought understand the sign applied for as being a quality of the goods in question, being namely ‘hand cleansers; hand soaps; hand lotions; hand washes’ in class 3 and also for all the goods in class 5, which comprise inter alia, ‘wipes, medicated and sanitizing soaps, antibacterial handwash, hand creams’ and other related goods.

The Office further provided internet extracts showing the that the sign in question is commonly used in the relevant market. Given that the sign has a clear descriptive meaning, it is also devoid of any distinctive character and therefore objectionable under Article 7(1)(b) EUTMR, as it is incapable of performing the essential function of a trade mark, which is to distinguish the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings.

The applicant failed to submit observations within the time limit. 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 018 236 400 is hereby rejected for all the goods 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.

Inês RIBEIRO DA CUNHA