CELEX: 62016TA0178
Language: en
Date: 2017-04-06 00:00:00
Title: Case T-178/16: Judgment of the General Court of 6 April 2017 — Policolor v EUIPO — CWS-Lackfabrik Conrad W. Schmidt (Policolor) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark Policolor — Earlier EU figurative mark ProfiColor — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)

22.5.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 161/27
            
         Judgment of the General Court of 6 April 2017 — Policolor v EUIPO — CWS-Lackfabrik Conrad W. Schmidt (Policolor)
   (Case T-178/16) (1)
   
   ((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark Policolor - Earlier EU figurative mark ProfiColor - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))
   (2017/C 161/37)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Policolor SA (Bucharest, Romania) (represented by: M. Comanescu, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Rajh, acting as Agent)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: CWS-Lackfabrik Conrad W. Schmidt GmbH & Co. KG (Düren-Merken, Germany)
   
      Re:
   
   Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 January 2016 (Case R 346/2015-1), relating to opposition proceedings between CWS-Lackfabrik Conrad W. Schmidt and Policolor.
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Dismisses the action;
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Orders Policolor SA to pay the costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 211, 13.6.2016.