Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 16 October 2018 –  
Asics v EUIPO — Van Lieshout Textielagenturen (Representation of four crossing lines)

(Case T‑581/17)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for registration of the EU figurative mark representing four crossed lines — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 and Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 and Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001) — No similarity between the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001))

| 1. | EU trade mark—Procedural provisions—Examination of the facts of the Office’s own motion—Duty of diligence  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 76(1))  (see para. 19) |

| 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—Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 35, 36, 42, 53) |

| 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 representing four crossing lines  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 8(1)(b) and 5)  (see paras 46-48, 63, 64) |

| 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—High distinctiveness of the earlier mark—Irrelevant where no similarity between the marks concerned  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 56) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 June 2017 (Case R 2129/2016-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Asics Corporation and Van Lieshout Textielagenturen.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Asics Corporation to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)