Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 24 October 2017.UAB Keturi kambariai v European Union Intellectual Property Office.EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark coffee inn — Earlier national figurative mark coffee in — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) of Regulation 2017/1001).Case T-202/16.

Judgment // 24/10/2017 // 2 min read
bookmark 28 citations

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 24 October 2017 – Keturi kambariai v EUIPO – Coffee In (coffee inn)

(Case T-202/16)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark coffee inn — Earlier national figurative mark coffee in — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8 (1) (b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8 (1) (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 42 (2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 47 (2) of Regulation 2017/1001))

  1. EU trade mark–Observations of third parties and opposition–Examination of the opposition–Proof of use of the earlier mark–Genuine use–Meaning–Interpretation taking account of the rationale of Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, tenth recital and Art. 42(2) and (3); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rule 22(3))

(see para. 29)

  1. EU trade mark–Observations of third parties and opposition–Examination of the opposition–Proof of use of the earlier mark–Genuine use–Meaning–Criteria for assessment

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 42(2) and (3))

(see paras 30-32)

  1. EU trade mark–Observations of third parties and opposition–Examination of the opposition–Proof of use of the earlier mark–Genuine use–Application of the criteria to the case in question

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 42(2) and (3))

(see para. 33)

  1. EU trade mark–Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark–Relative grounds for refusal–Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services–Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark–Criteria for assessment

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see para. 71)

  1. EU trade mark–Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark–Relative grounds for refusal–Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services–Similarity of the marks concerned–Criteria for assessment–Composite mark

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 91, 92)

  1. EU trade mark–Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark–Relative grounds for refusal–Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services–Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark–Figuartive marks coffee inn and coffee in

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 134, 135)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 March 2016 (Case R 137/2015-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Coffee In and Keturi kambariai.

Operative part

The Court:

  1. Dismisses the appeal;

  2. Orders UAB Keturi kambariai to pay the costs.

Trade marks