CELEX: 62009TA0213
Language: en
Date: 2011-02-15 00:00:00
Title: Case T-213/09: Judgment of the General Court of 15 February 2011 — Yorma's v OHIM — Norma Lebensmittelfilialbetrieb (YORMA’S) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark including the word element ‘yorma’s’ — Earlier Community word mark NORMA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

26.3.2011   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 95/7
            
         Judgment of the General Court of 15 February 2011 — Yorma's v OHIM — Norma Lebensmittelfilialbetrieb (YORMA’S)
   (Case T-213/09) (1)
   
   (Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark including the word element ‘yorma’s’ - Earlier Community word mark NORMA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
   2011/C 95/11
   Language of the case: German
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Yorma’s AG (Deggendorf, Germany) (represented by: A. Weiß, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Schäffner, acting as Agent)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Norma Lebensmittelfilialbetrieb GmbH & Co. KG (Nuremberg, Germany) (represented by: A. von Welser, lawyer)
   
      Re:
   
   Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 February 2009 (Case R 1879/2007-1), concerning opposition proceedings between Norma Lebensmittelfilialbetrieb GmbH & Co. KG and Yorma’s AG
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               dismisses the action;
            
         
               2.
            
            
               orders Yorma’s AG to pay the costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 180, 1.8.2009.