Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 January 2014 — nfon v Fon Wireless and OHIM

(Case C‑193/13 P)

‛Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Figurative mark including the word element ‘nfon’ — Opposition by the proprietor of Community figurative mark including the word element ‘fon’ and of the national word mark FON — Rejection of the opposition by the Board of Appeal of OHIM’

1. 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 paras 26, 28)

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 — Assessment criteria (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 36, 37)

3. Appeals — Grounds — Error of law — Failure to take account of all the relevant factors for the assessment of the likelihood of confusion within the meaning of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see paras 51, 52)

Re :

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 29 January 2013 in Case T‑283/11 Fon Wireless v OHIM — Nfon (Nfon) by which the General Court altered the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 18 March 2011 (Case R 1017/2009 4) to the effect that nfon AG’s appeal to the Board of Appeal is dismissed — Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. nfon AG is ordered to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Fon Wireless Ltd.

3. The Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) is ordered to bear its own costs.

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 January 2014 — nfon v Fon Wireless and OHIM

(Case C‑193/13 P)

‛Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Figurative mark including the word element ‘nfon’ — Opposition by the proprietor of Community figurative mark including the word element ‘fon’ and of the national word mark FON — Rejection of the opposition by the Board of Appeal of OHIM’

1. 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 paras 26, 28)

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 — Assessment criteria (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 36, 37)

3. Appeals — Grounds — Error of law — Failure to take account of all the relevant factors for the assessment of the likelihood of confusion within the meaning of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see paras 51, 52)

Re :

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 29 January 2013 in Case T‑283/11 Fon Wireless v OHIM — Nfon (Nfon) by which the General Court altered the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 18 March 2011 (Case R 1017/2009 4) to the effect that nfon AG’s appeal to the Board of Appeal is dismissed — Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. nfon AG is ordered to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Fon Wireless Ltd.