translate English to French: OHIM and the intervener contend that the Board of Appeal was fully entitled to hold that the earlier marks and the contested mark were not similar and that there was no likelihood of confusion between them. Findings of the Court 28 First, it must be pointed out that the Board of Appeal restricted its examination to goods in Class 20, the contested decision stating only that the goods and services included within Classes 16 and 42 are ancillary to furniture.
Le risque de confusion doit être apprécié globalement, selon la perception que le public pertinent a des signes et des produits ou services en cause, et en tenant compte de tous les facteurs pertinents en l’espèce, notamment de l’interdépendance entre la similitude des signes et celle des produits ou des services désignés [voir arrêt du Tribunal du 9 juillet 2003, Laboratorios RTB/OHMI – Giorgio Beverly Hills (GIORGIO BEVERLY HILLS), T-162/01, Rec. p.