This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010TA0444
Case T-444/10: Judgment of the General Court of 21 February 2013 — Esge v OHIM — De’Longhi Benelux (KMIX) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark KMIX — Earlier Community word mark BAMIX — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Case T-444/10: Judgment of the General Court of 21 February 2013 — Esge v OHIM — De’Longhi Benelux (KMIX) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark KMIX — Earlier Community word mark BAMIX — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Case T-444/10: Judgment of the General Court of 21 February 2013 — Esge v OHIM — De’Longhi Benelux (KMIX) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark KMIX — Earlier Community word mark BAMIX — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
OJ C 108, 13.4.2013, p. 21–22
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
13.4.2013 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 108/21 |
Judgment of the General Court of 21 February 2013 — Esge v OHIM — De’Longhi Benelux (KMIX)
(Case T-444/10) (1)
(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark KMIX - Earlier Community word mark BAMIX - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2013/C 108/57
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Esge AG (Bussnang, Switzerland) (represented by: J. Klink, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Geroulakos, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: De’Longhi Benelux SA, formerly Kenwood Appliances Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: P. Strickland, Solicitor, and L. St. Ville, Barrister)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 July 2010 (Case R 1249/2009-2), concerning opposition proceedings between Esge AG and Kenwood Appliances Luxembourg SA.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Esge AG to pay the costs. |