contain no metal inlays that cannot be separated by a single person using simple tools;

As regards the fact that, as well as the speckles, the tablet at issue features a[n] . inlay in the centre of its upper surface, the Board of Appeal’s finding that the presence of such an inlay is not sufficient for the tablet’s appearance to be perceived as indicative of the product’s origin is justified.

By applications lodged at the Court Registry on 6 December 2001, Procter Gamble Company (‘Procter Gamble’) appealed pursuant to Article 49 of the EC Statute of the Court of Justice against the judgments of the Court of First Instance of 19 September 2001 in Case T-128/00 Procter Gamble v OHIM (Square tablet with inlay) [2001] ECR II-2785 (‘Case T-128/00’) and Case T‑129/00 Procter Gamble v OHIM (Rectangular tablet with inlay) [2001] ECR II-2793 (‘Case T‑129/00’), (together hereinafter referred to as ‘the judgments under appeal’), by which the Court of First Instance partially dismissed its actions for annulment of the decisions of the Th ...[+++]ird Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (‘OHIM’) of 8 March 2000 (Cases R‑506/1999‑1 and R‑508/1999‑1), which had rejected its appeals against the refusal to register as Community trade marks three-dimensional tablets for washing machines or dishwashers (‘the contested decisions’).

Where various ingredients are to be combined in a washing machine or dishwashing product in tablet form, adding an inlay to the middle of the tablet is one of the most obvious solutions. The fact that the inlay consists of a slight depression in the tablet’s centre does not change the tablet’s appearance significantly and is therefore not likely to influence consumers’ perception.

TWO APPEALS against the judgments of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities (Second Chamber) of 19 September 2001 in Case T-128/00 Procter Gamble v OHIM (square tablet with inlay) [2001] ECR II-2785 and Case T-129/00 Procter Gamble v OHIM (rectangular tablet with inlay) [2001] ECR II-2793, seeking to have those judgments set aside in part, the other party to the proceedings being: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), represented by D. Schennen and C. Røhl Søberg, acting as Agents,

- contain no metal inlays that cannot be separated;