CELEX: 62006TA0205
Language: en
Date: 2008-05-22 00:00:00
Title: Case T-205/06: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 22 May 2008 — NewSoft Technology v OHIM — Soft (Presto! BizCard Reader) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark Presto! BizCard Reader — Earlier national figurative marks Presto — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

5.7.2008   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 171/31
            
         Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 22 May 2008 — NewSoft Technology v OHIM — Soft (Presto! BizCard Reader)
   (Case T-205/06) (1)
   
   (Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark Presto! BizCard Reader - Earlier national figurative marks Presto - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
   (2008/C 171/56)
   Language of the case: German
   Parties
   
      Applicant: NewSoft Technology Corp. (Taipei, Taiwan) (represented by: M. Dirksen-Schwanenland, U. von Sothen and M. Di Stefano, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, Agent)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Soft, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: A. Velázquez Ibáñez and P. Merino Baylos, lawyers)
   Re:
   Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 May 2006 (Case R 601/2005-2) relating to invalidity proceedings between Soft, SA and NewSoft Technology Corp.
   Operative part of the judgment
   
               1.
            
            
               The action is dismissed.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               NewSoft Technology Corp. is ordered to pay the costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 237, 30.9.2006.