Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 12 April 2016 —

Auyantepui Corp. v EUIPO — Magda Rose (Mr Jones)

(Case T‑8/15)

‛EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for European Union figurative mark Mr Jones — Earlier international figurative mark Jones — 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 paras 16, 17) |

| 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 paras 18, 19, 27, 28, 42) |

| 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 — Figurative marks Mr Jones and Jones (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 20, 43-45) |

| 4. | EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Re-evaluation of the facts in the light of evidence produced for the first time before it — Not included (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 188; Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65) (see para. 33) |

| 5. | EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Review of the lawfulness of decisions of the Boards of Appeal (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65) (see para. 48) |

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 October 2014 (Case R 49/2014-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Magda Rose GmbH & Co. KG and Auyantepui Corp., SA.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Auyantepui Corp., SA, to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)