Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 24 November 2016 —  
SeNaPro v EUIPO — Paltentaler Splitt & Marmorwerke (Dolokorn)

(Case T‑769/15)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark Dolokorn — Earlier EU word mark DOLOPUR — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

| 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 para. 16) |

| 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. 17) |

| 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 Dolokorn and DOLOPUR  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 18-22) |

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 October 2015 (Case R 2643/2014-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Paltentaler Splitt & Marmorwerke and SeNaPro.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders SeNaPro GmbH to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)