CELEX: 62011TA0216
Language: en
Date: 2014-01-28 00:00:00
Title: Case T-216/11: Judgment of the General Court of 28 January 2014 — Progust v OHIM — Sopralex & Vosmarques (IMPERIA) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark IMPERIA — Earlier Community figurative mark IMPERIAL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Distinctive character of the earlier mark — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

8.3.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 71/16
            
         
      Judgment of the General Court of 28 January 2014 — Progust v OHIM — Sopralex & Vosmarques (IMPERIA)
      (Case T-216/11) (1)
      
      (Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark IMPERIA - Earlier Community figurative mark IMPERIAL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Distinctive character of the earlier mark - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
      (2014/C 71/27)
      Language of the case: Spanish
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: Progust, SL (Girona, Spain) (represented by: initially M. E. López Camba, J. L. Rivas Zurdo, E. Seijo Veiguela and I. Munilla Muñoz, then J. L. Rivas Zurdo, E. Seijo Veiguela et I. Munilla Muñoz, lawyers)
      
         Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: V. Melgar, acting as Agent)
      
         Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Sopralex & Vosmarques SA (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: P. Maeyaert and V. Fossoul, lawyers)
      
         Re:
      
      Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 January 2011 (Case R 1036/2010-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Sopralex & Vosmarques SA and Progust, SL.
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      The Court:
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Dismisses the action;
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Orders Progust, SL to pay the costs.
               
            
         (1)  OJ C 194, 2.7.2011.