CELEX: 62015TN0773
Language: en
Date: 2015-12-23 00:00:00
Title: Case T-773/15: Action brought on 23 December 2015 — BBY Solutions v OHIM — Worldwide Sales Corporation España (BEST BUY)

29.2.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 78/31
            
         Action brought on 23 December 2015 — BBY Solutions v OHIM — Worldwide Sales Corporation España (BEST BUY)
   (Case T-773/15)
   (2016/C 078/42)
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: BBY Solutions, Inc. (Minneapolis, United States) (represented by: A. Poulter, Solicitor)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Worldwide Sales Corporation España, SL (Sant Vicenç dels Horts, Spain)
   
      Details of the proceedings before OHIM
   
   
      Applicant: Applicant
   
      Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘BEST BUY’ — Application for registration No 6 065 403
   
      Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings
   
      Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 October 2015 in Joined Cases R 733/2015-2 and R 780/2015-2
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the decision of the Board of Appeal of 8 October 2015 in Case R-0780/2015-2 to the extent that it upheld the opposition;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul the decision of the Opposition division dated 23 February 2015 in Opposition No. B 1312208 to the extent that it upheld the opposition;
            
         
               —
            
            
               accept the CTM Application No 006065403 for registration;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Defendant to bear its own costs and pay those of the Applicant.
            
         
      Pleas in law
   
   
               —
            
            
               The Board infringed Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 by wrongly assessing the dominant and distinctive elements of the marks;
            
         
               —
            
            
               The Board infringed Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 by wrongly assessing the overall impression created by the marks;
            
         
               —
            
            
               The Board infringed Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 by wrongly assessing the identity or similarity of the goods and services covered by the marks; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               The Board infringed Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 by wrongly concluding that there was a likelihood of confusion between the Opponent’s earlier marks and the Applicant’s Mark.