This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010CB0532
Case C-532/10 P: Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 June 2011 — adp Gauselmann GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Likelihood of confusion — Figurative mark Archer Maclean’s Mercury — Opposition by the proprietor of the national word mark Merkur)
Case C-532/10 P: Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 June 2011 — adp Gauselmann GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Likelihood of confusion — Figurative mark Archer Maclean’s Mercury — Opposition by the proprietor of the national word mark Merkur)
Case C-532/10 P: Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 June 2011 — adp Gauselmann GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Likelihood of confusion — Figurative mark Archer Maclean’s Mercury — Opposition by the proprietor of the national word mark Merkur)
OJ C 311, 22.10.2011, p. 14–14
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
22.10.2011 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 311/14 |
Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 June 2011 — adp Gauselmann GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(Case C-532/10 P) (1)
(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(1)(b) - Likelihood of confusion - Figurative mark Archer Maclean’s Mercury - Opposition by the proprietor of the national word mark Merkur)
2011/C 311/21
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: adp Gauselmann GmbH (represented by: P. Koch Moreno, abogada)
Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)
Re:
Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 9 September 2010 in Case T-106/09 adp Gauselmann v OHIM by which the General Court dismissed an action for annulment brought by the proprietor of the national word mark ‘Merkur’ for goods in Classes 6, 9, 28, 35, 37, 41 and 42 against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 12 January 2009 in Case R 1266/2007-1 dismissing the appeal against the Opposition Division’s decision, which rejected the opposition brought by the appellant against the registration of the figurative mark ‘Archer Maclean’s Mercury’ in respect of goods in Classes 9, 16 and 28 — Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) — Likelihood of confusion — Criteria for assessment
Operative part of the order
|
1. |
The appeal is dismissed. |
|
2. |
adp Gauselmann GmbH shall pay the costs. |