Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 22 March 2012 — Emram v OHIM

(Case C-354/11 P)

‛Appeal — Article 119 of the Rules of Procedure — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Application for registration of the figurative mark G — Trade marks’

1. 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 — Earlier mark only weakly distinctive — Effect (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 44)

2. Appeals — Grounds — Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1), TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 48)

3. Community trade mark — Decisions of the Office — Whether lawful — Examination by the Community judicature — Criteria (Council Regulation No 40/94) (see para. 92)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 10 May 2011 in Case T-187/10 Emram v OHIM dismissing the action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 February 2010 (Case R 1281/2008-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Guccio Gucci SpA and Mr Emram — Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) — Application for Community figurative mark G — Likelihood of confusion — Distortion of the evidence — Incorrect assessment of the distinctive character — Infringement of the principle of equal treatment.

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Mr Emram is ordered to pay the costs.

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 22 March 2012 — Emram v OHIM

(Case C-354/11 P)

‛Appeal — Article 119 of the Rules of Procedure — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Application for registration of the figurative mark G — Trade marks’

1. 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 — Earlier mark only weakly distinctive — Effect (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 44)

2. Appeals — Grounds — Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1), TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 48)

3. Community trade mark — Decisions of the Office — Whether lawful — Examination by the Community judicature — Criteria (Council Regulation No 40/94) (see para. 92)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 10 May 2011 in Case T-187/10 Emram v OHIM dismissing the action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 February 2010 (Case R 1281/2008-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Guccio Gucci SpA and Mr Emram — Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) — Application for Community figurative mark G — Likelihood of confusion — Distortion of the evidence — Incorrect assessment of the distinctive character — Infringement of the principle of equal treatment.

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.