Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2018:528
Date: 2018-09-12
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Germany

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 12 September 2018 – Pelikan v EUIPO — NBA Properties (NEW ORLEANS PELICANS) (Case T‑112/17) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark NEW ORLEANS PELICANS — Earlier EU word marks and earlier national figurative mark Pelikan — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) 1. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 18, 19) 2. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 22) 3. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 NEW ORLEANS PELICANS — Word marks and figurative mark Pelikan (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 40-44, 47, 49, 59) 4. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 — Early mark occupying a distinctive independent position in the trade mark sought (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 62) Re: Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 December 2016 (Case R 408/2016-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Pelikan Vertriebsgesellschaft and NBA Properties. Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Pelikan Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG to pay the costs. 2. Orders Pelikan Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.