EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62014TA0320

Case T-320/14: Judgment of the General Court of 25 November 2015 — Sephora v OHIM — Mayfield Trading (Representation of two undulating vertical lines) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark representing two undulating vertical lines — National and international figurative marks representing an undulating vertical line — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

OJ C 16, 18.1.2016, p. 33–33 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

18.1.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/33


Judgment of the General Court of 25 November 2015 — Sephora v OHIM — Mayfield Trading (Representation of two undulating vertical lines)

(Case T-320/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark representing two undulating vertical lines - National and international figurative marks representing an undulating vertical line - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 016/40)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Sephora (Boulogne-Billancourt, France) (represented by: H. Delabarre, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: V. Melgar, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Mayfield Trading Ltd (Las Vegas, Nevada, United States of America) (represented by: A. Tarí Lázaro, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 24 February 2014 (Case R 1577/2013-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Sephora and Mayfield Trading Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.

Dismisses the action;

2.

Orders Sephora to pay the costs.


(1)  OJ C 212, 7.7.2014.


Top