Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 10 October 2017 — Asna v EUIPO — Wings Software (ASNA WINGS)

(Case T‑382/16)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark ASNA WINGS — Earlier Benelux word mark WINGS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Evidence submitted for the first time before the Court)

| 1. | 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—Annulment or variation for reasons appearing after judgment was delivered—Not included  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65(2))  (see para 17) |

| 2. | EU trade mark—Observations of third parties and opposition—Examination of the opposition—Proof of use of the earlier mark—Genuine use—Meaning—Interpretation taking account of the rationale of Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, tenth recital and Art. 42(2) and (3); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rule 22(3))  (see paras 23-25) |

| 3. | EU trade mark—Observations of third parties and opposition—Examination of the opposition—Proof of use of the earlier mark—Genuine use—Meaning—Criteria for assessment—Requirement of solid and objective evidence  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 42(2) and (3); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rule 22(3))  (see paras 26-31) |

| 4. | 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 47-49, 90) |

| 5. | 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—Assessment of the likelihood of confusion—Determination of the relevant public—Attention level of the public  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para 50) |

| 6. | 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 ASNA WINGS and WINGS  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 51, 54, 91-93) |

| 7. | 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 between the goods or services in question—Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para 52) |

| 8. | 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—Composite mark  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 57, 58) |

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 April 2016 (Case R 436/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Wings Software BVBA and Asna, Inc.,

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Asna, Inc. to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)