Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2015:880
Date: 2015-11-25
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded

summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based — Pleas in law not set out in the application — General reference to other documents — Inadmissibility (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 76) (see para. 14) 2. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 15-18, 39) 3. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Similarity between the goods or services in question — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 20) 4. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Similarity of the marks concerned — Criteria for assessment — Composite mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 26, 27) 5. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — figurative mark JUICE masafi and word mark masafi (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 34-38, 40) Re: ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 February 2014 (Case R 119/2013-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Hd1 Ltd and Masafi Co. LLC. Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Masafi Co. LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).