This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021TJ0644
Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 21 December 2022.
Pharmadom v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark WellBe PHARMACEUTICALS – Earlier national word mark WELL AND WELL – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – No similarity between the signs – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001).
Case T-644/21.
Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 21 December 2022.
Pharmadom v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark WellBe PHARMACEUTICALS – Earlier national word mark WELL AND WELL – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – No similarity between the signs – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001).
Case T-644/21.
Court reports – general – 'Information on unpublished decisions' section
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2022:847
Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 21 December 2022 –
Pharmadom v EUIPO – Wellbe Pharmaceuticals (WellBe PHARMACEUTICALS)
(Case T‑644/21) ( 1 )
(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark WellBe PHARMACEUTICALS – Earlier national word mark WELL AND WELL – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – No similarity between the signs – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
|
1. |
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 (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 18, 19, 50) |
|
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 – Similarity of the marks concerned – Assessment of the distinctive character of an element of which a trade mark is composed (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 27-29) |
|
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 – Figurative mark WellBe PHARMACEUTICALS and word mark WELL AND WELL (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 31-36, 41, 43, 46, 49, 55-59) |
Operative part
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Pharmadom to pay the costs. |
( 1 ) OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.