CELEX: 62015TA0390
Language: en
Date: 2016-09-13 00:00:00
Title: Case T-390/15: Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2016 — Perfetti Van Melle Benelux v EUIPO — PepsiCo (3D) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark 3D — Earlier EU word and figurative marks 3D’S and 3D’s — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No (EC) No 207/2009)

24.10.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 392/37
            
         Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2016 — Perfetti Van Melle Benelux v EUIPO — PepsiCo (3D)
   (Case T-390/15) (1)
   
   ((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark 3D - Earlier EU word and figurative marks 3D’S and 3D’s - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No (EC) No 207/2009))
   (2016/C 392/47)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Perfetti Van Melle Benelux BV (Breda, Netherlands) (represented by: P. Testa, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: PepsiCo, Inc. (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers)
   
      Re:
   
   Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 May 2015 (Case R 465/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between PepsiCo and Perfetti Van Melle Benelux.
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Dismisses the action;
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Orders Perfetti Van Melle Benelux BV to pay the costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 311, 21.9.2015.