Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 December 2017 – RRTec v EUIPO – Mobotec (RROFA)

(Case T-912/16)

(European Union trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark RROFA — Prior EU word mark ROFA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

| 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 19, 20, 49) |

| 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–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 paras 22, 56) |

| 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 mark RROFA and word mark ROFA  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 35, 41-48, 55) |

| 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–Similarity of the marks concerned–Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 36) |

| 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–Similarity of the marks concerned–Visual similarity between a figurative mark and a word mark  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 40) |

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 October 2016 (Case R 2392/2015-1) concerning opposition proceedings between Mobotec and RRTec.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders RRTec sp. z o.o. to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)