Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 June 2023.Laboratorios Ern, SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office.EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark BIOPLAN – Earlier national word mark BIOPLAK – Relative ground for refusal – No similarity between the goods – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.Case T-543/22.

Judgment // 07/06/2023 // 2 min read
bookmark

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 June 2023 –Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO – BRM Extremities (BIOPLAN)

(Case T‑543/22) ( 1 )

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark BIOPLAN – Earlier national word mark BIOPLAK – Relative ground for refusal – No similarity between the goods – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

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

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

(see paragraphs 19, 20)

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

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

(see paragraphs 24, 27, 36, 37)

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

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

(see paragraphs 25, 26, 28, 29)

  1. EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Legality – EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice

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

(see paragraph 40)

Operative part

The Court:

  1. Dismisses the action;

  2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 408, 24.10.2022.

Trade marks