62021TJ0537_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 5 October 2022 –bett1.de v EUIPO – XXXLutz Marken (BODY STAR)
(Case T‑537/21) (
1
)
(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark BODY STAR – Earlier EU word mark Bodyguard – Earlier national word mark Bodyguard – Relative ground for refusal – 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 paragraphs 15, 16, 43, 44)
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 – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Attention level of the public
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 18, 19)
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 – Word marks BODY STAR and Bodyguard
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 24-26, 30-32, 41, 42, 45, 50-53)
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 – Complementary nature of the goods or services
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 27, 33)
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 June 2021 (Joined Cases R 1711/2020-2 et R 1727/2020-2) as regards ‘mattresses; mattress toppers; beds; bed frames; slatted bases for beds; bedding except linen; cushions; pillows; neck-supporting pillows; waterbeds, not for medical purposes; air mattresses’ in Class 20 and ‘bed blankets; bed linen and blankets; ticks [mattress covers]; mattress covers; ticks (mattress and pillow coverings); sleeping bags’ in Class 24;
2.
Dismisses the action as to the remainder;
3.
Orders each party to bear its own costs.
(
1
)	OJ C 422, 18.10.2021.