This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62016TA0049
Case T-49/16: Judgment of the General Court of 6 April 2017 — Azanta v EUIPO — Novartis (NIMORAL) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark NIMORAL — Earlier EU word mark NEORAL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Case T-49/16: Judgment of the General Court of 6 April 2017 — Azanta v EUIPO — Novartis (NIMORAL) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark NIMORAL — Earlier EU word mark NEORAL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Case T-49/16: Judgment of the General Court of 6 April 2017 — Azanta v EUIPO — Novartis (NIMORAL) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark NIMORAL — Earlier EU word mark NEORAL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
OJ C 161, 22.5.2017, p. 26–26
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
22.5.2017 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 161/26 |
Judgment of the General Court of 6 April 2017 — Azanta v EUIPO — Novartis (NIMORAL)
(Case T-49/16) (1)
((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark NIMORAL - Earlier EU word mark NEORAL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2017/C 161/36)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Azanta A/S (Hellerup, Denmark) (represented by: M. Hoffgaard Rasmussen, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas, Agent)
Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Novartis AG (Basel, Switzerland)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 December 2015 (Case R 634/2015-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Novartis and Azanta.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Azanta A/S to pay the costs. |