CELEX: 62011TN0537
Language: en
Date: 2011-10-10 00:00:00
Title: Case T-537/11: Action brought on 10 October 2011 — Hultafors Group v OHIM — Società Italiana Calzature (Snickers)

10.12.2011   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 362/20
            
         Action brought on 10 October 2011 — Hultafors Group v OHIM — Società Italiana Calzature (Snickers)
   (Case T-537/11)
   2011/C 362/30
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Hultafors Group AB (Bollebygd, Sweden) (represented by: A. Rasmussen and T. Swanstrøm, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Società Italiana Calzature SpA (Milano, Italy)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 9 August 2011 in case R 2519/2010-4; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the defendant to bear its own as well as the third party’s costs, including those incurred during the appeal and opposition proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
   
      Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark in black and white ‘Snickers’, for goods in classes 8, 9 and 25 — Community trade mark application No 3740719
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: Italian trade mark registration No 348149 of the word mark ‘KICKERS’, for goods in classes 3, 14, 16, 18, 24, 25, 28, 32 and 33
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition for all the contested goods
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal wrongly assumed that a risk of confusion exists between the trade mark application and the opposing trademark.