62018TJ0454_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 10 October 2019 –Biasotto v EUIPO — Oofos (OO)
(Case T‑454/18)
(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark OO — Earlier EU figurative mark OO — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) 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
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 15, 16, 56)
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 — Composite mark
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 22, 28, 39)
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 marks OO
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 35, 41, 44, 50, 57, 58)
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 — Similarity between the goods or services in question — Criteria for assessment
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see para. 48)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 May 2018 (Case R 1281/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Oofos and Mr Biasotto.
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Orders Mr Alessandro Biasotto to pay the costs.