Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 22 March 2023 –  
adp Merkur v EUIPO – psmtec (SEVEN SEVEN 7)

(Case T‑408/22) (
[1](#t-ECR_62022TJ0408_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark SEVEN SEVEN 7 – Earlier EU word mark Seven – Relative grounds for refusal – Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – No genuine use – Article 47(2) of Regulation 2017/1001)

| 1. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Concept – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2))  (see paragraphs 15, 17-19) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Burden of proof incumbent on the proprietor  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2))  (see paragraph 16) |

| 3. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Concept – Criteria for assessment – Requirement of solid and objective evidence  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2))  (see paragraph 20) |

| 4. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Word mark Seven  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2))  (see paragraphs 33, 35-40) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62022TJ0408_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 318, 22.8.2022](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2022:318:TOC).

[Top](#document1)