1. 

Judicial proceedings – Decision taken by way of reasoned order – Conditions – Appeal manifestly inadmissible or manifestly lacking any foundation in law

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 126)

(see paras 16, 63)

2. 

EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 24, 58, 59)

3. 

EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Attention level of the public

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 26, 29, 31, 32, 35)

4. 

EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Word mark WONDERLAND and WONDERMIX

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 36, 38, 42, 45, 46, 57, 62)

5. 

EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the goods or services in question – Criteria for assessment

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see para. 37)

6. 

EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 39, 44, 53, 56)

1. 

The action is dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law.

2. 

Katjes Fassin GmbH & Co. KG is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Haribo The Netherlands & Belgium BV.