Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 10 October 2019

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markRelative grounds for refusalOpposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or servicesLikelihood of confusion with the earlier markCriteria for assessment

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 15, 16, 56)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markRelative grounds for refusalOpposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or servicesSimilarity of the marks concernedCriteria for assessmentComposite mark

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 22, 28, 39)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markRelative grounds for refusalOpposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or servicesLikelihood of confusion with the earlier markFigurative marks OO

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 35, 41, 44, 50, 57, 58)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markRelative grounds for refusalOpposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or servicesSimilarity between the goods or services in questionCriteria for assessment

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see para. 48)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 May 2018 (Case R 1281/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Oofos and Mr Biasotto.

Operative part

The Court:

Dismisses the action;

Orders Mr Alessandro Biasotto to pay the costs.