Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document C2007/096/68

Joined Cases T-333/04 and T-334/04: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 18 April 2007 — House of Donuts International v OHIM — Panrico (House of Donuts) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Applications for Community figurative marks House of donuts — Earlier national word marks DONUT and earlier figurative marks donuts — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion)

OJ C 96, 28.4.2007, p. 33–33 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

28.4.2007   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 96/33


Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 18 April 2007 — House of Donuts International v OHIM — Panrico (House of Donuts)

(Joined Cases T-333/04 and T-334/04) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Applications for Community figurative marks ‘House of donuts’ - Earlier national word marks ‘DONUT ’and earlier figurative marks ‘donuts’ - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion)

(2007/C 96/68)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: House of Donuts International (George Town, Grand Cayman) (represented by: N. Decker, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Laitinen and A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the Court of First Instance: Panrico, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: D. Pellisé Urquiza, lawyer)

Re:

Two actions brought against the decisions of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 12 May 2004 (Cases R 1034/2001-4 and R 1036/2001-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Panrico, SA and House of Donuts International

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.

Dismisses the action;

2.

Orders the applicant to pay the costs of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) and of the intervener.


(1)  OJ C 300, 4.12.2004.


Top