This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62022TA0025
Case T-25/22: Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2023 — Canai Technology v EUIPO — Trend Fin (HE&ME) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark HE&ME — Earlier Benelux word mark ME — Relative ground for refusal — Similarity of the signs — Weak distinctive character of the earlier mark — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Case T-25/22: Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2023 — Canai Technology v EUIPO — Trend Fin (HE&ME) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark HE&ME — Earlier Benelux word mark ME — Relative ground for refusal — Similarity of the signs — Weak distinctive character of the earlier mark — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Case T-25/22: Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2023 — Canai Technology v EUIPO — Trend Fin (HE&ME) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark HE&ME — Earlier Benelux word mark ME — Relative ground for refusal — Similarity of the signs — Weak distinctive character of the earlier mark — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
OJ C 134, 17.4.2023, p. 11–12
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
17.4.2023 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 134/11 |
Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2023 — Canai Technology v EUIPO — Trend Fin (HE&ME)
(Case T-25/22) (1)
(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark HE&ME - Earlier Benelux word mark ME - Relative ground for refusal - Similarity of the signs - Weak distinctive character of the earlier mark - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2023/C 134/14)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Canai Technology Co. Ltd (Guangzhou, China) (represented by: J.F. Gallego Jiménez, E. Sanz Valls, P. Bauzá Martínez, Y. Hernández Viñes and C. Marí Aguilar, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Trend Fin BV (Utrecht, Netherlands) (represented by: F. Folmer, L. Bekke and T. de Haan, lawyers)
Re:
By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 November 2021 (Case R 1390/2020-1).
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Canai Technology Co. Ltd to pay the costs. |