This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011TN0624
Case T-624/11: Action brought on 30 November 2011 — Yueqing Onesto Electric v OHIM — Ensto (ONESTO)
Case T-624/11: Action brought on 30 November 2011 — Yueqing Onesto Electric v OHIM — Ensto (ONESTO)
Case T-624/11: Action brought on 30 November 2011 — Yueqing Onesto Electric v OHIM — Ensto (ONESTO)
OJ C 32, 4.2.2012, p. 38–39
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
4.2.2012 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 32/38 |
Action brought on 30 November 2011 — Yueqing Onesto Electric v OHIM — Ensto (ONESTO)
(Case T-624/11)
2012/C 32/76
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Yueqing Onesto Electric Co. Ltd (Zhejiang, China) (represented by: B. Piepenbrink, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Ensto Oy (Porvoo, Finland)
Form of order sought
|
— |
Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 20 September 2011 in case R 2535/2010-2; and |
|
— |
Order that the defendant to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘ONESTO’, for goods in class 9 — Community trade mark application No W00909305
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 1980242 of the figurative mark ‘ENSTO’, for goods in classes 7, 9 and 11; Community trade mark registration No 40600 of the word mark ‘ENSTO’, for goods in classes 7, 9, 11 and 16; Finish trade mark registration No 218071 of the word mark ‘ENSTO’, for goods in classes 7, 9 and 11
Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition in its entirety
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the contested decision and rejected the community trade mark application
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal erroneously found that there exists a likelihood of confusion between the earlier mark and the Community trade mark application.