After the Examiner of the OHIM and the Second Board of Appeal, the General Court confirmed on September 28, 2010, that a CTM application representing the pocket of a jean could not mature into registration for products of classes 18 and 25 because it lacked distinctiveness.
For the Court, the sign at hands would only be perceived by the public as an ordinary decoration of a pocket for the goods claimed and would be deprived of any particular memorable and specially catching elements so that it would prevent from identifying a particular origin of said goods.
The decision can be considered as in line with the Community case law with regards to ‘trousers’ specified in the application. But, it leaves perplex when it comes to other products claimed in class 25 such as ‘shirts, pullovers, hats, foulards, boots’ for instance and even more doubtful (legally speaking) as to ‘bags, wallets, valises, vanity cases, umbrella’ claimed in class 18.
For such products, the approach of the General Court may indeed look too radical especially considering the habits of the market concerned which certainly not consist in having a trouser pocket displayed on umbrella, hats, foulards, etc…