Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62015TA0407

    Case T-407/15: Judgment of the General Court of 20 October 2016 — Monster Energy v EUIPO — Hot-Can Intellectual Property (HotoGo self-heating can technology) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for an EU figurative mark HotoGo self-heating can technology — Earlier EU figurative marks representing claws — Relative grounds for refusal — No similarity of the signs — No likelihood of confusion — No connection between the signs — Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

    OJ C 454, 5.12.2016, p. 24–24 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    5.12.2016   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 454/24


    Judgment of the General Court of 20 October 2016 — Monster Energy v EUIPO — Hot-Can Intellectual Property (HotoGo self-heating can technology)

    (Case T-407/15) (1)

    ((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for an EU figurative mark HotoGo self-heating can technology - Earlier EU figurative marks representing claws - Relative grounds for refusal - No similarity of the signs - No likelihood of confusion - No connection between the signs - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

    (2016/C 454/43)

    Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Applicant: Monster Energy Company (Corona, California, United States) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

    Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral and P. Ivanov, Agents)

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Hot-Can Intellectual Property Sdn Bhd (Cheras, Malaysia)

    Re:

    Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 May 2015 (Case R 1028/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Monster Energy Company and Hot-Can Intellectual Property.

    Operative part of the judgment

    The Court:

    1.

    Dismisses the action;

    2.

    Orders Monster Energy Company to pay the costs.


    (1)  OJ C 311, 21.9.2015.


    Top