CELEX: 62011TN0355
Language: en
Date: 2011-07-05 00:00:00
Title: Case T-355/11: Action brought on 5 July 2011 — Segovia Bonet v OHIM — IES (IES)

10.9.2011   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 269/52
            
         Action brought on 5 July 2011 — Segovia Bonet v OHIM — IES (IES)
   (Case T-355/11)
   2011/C 269/115
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant(s): Jorge Segovia Bonet (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: M.E. López Camba and J.L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: IES Insurance Engineering Services Srl (Milan, Italy)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 29 March 2011 in case R 749/2010-2; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the defendant and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs of the proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘IES’, for services in classes 35, 36, 41, 42 and 45 — Community trade mark application No 6787345
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: UK trade mark registration No 2358802 of the figurative mark ‘IES’, for services in class 41
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld partially the opposition
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal and confirmed the decision of the Opposition Division
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal wrongly found that there was no likelihood of confusion between the earlier trademark and the contested community trade mark application as (i) the compared signs are confusingly similar, in particular from a phonetic point of view; and (ii) the services designated by the earlier registration are complementary to those designated by the contested Community trade mark application.