This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62012TA0453
Case T-453/12: Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2013 — Zoo Sport v OHIM — K-2 (ZOOSPORT) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark ZOOSPORT — Earlier Community word mark ZOOT and earlier Community figurative mark SPORTS ZOOT SPORTS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Case T-453/12: Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2013 — Zoo Sport v OHIM — K-2 (ZOOSPORT) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark ZOOSPORT — Earlier Community word mark ZOOT and earlier Community figurative mark SPORTS ZOOT SPORTS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Case T-453/12: Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2013 — Zoo Sport v OHIM — K-2 (ZOOSPORT) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark ZOOSPORT — Earlier Community word mark ZOOT and earlier Community figurative mark SPORTS ZOOT SPORTS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
IO C 352, 30.11.2013, p. 15–15
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
30.11.2013 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 352/15 |
Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2013 — Zoo Sport v OHIM — K-2 (ZOOSPORT)
(Case T-453/12) (1)
(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark ZOOSPORT - Earlier Community word mark ZOOT and earlier Community figurative mark SPORTS ZOOT SPORTS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2013/C 352/28
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Zoo Sport Ltd (Leeds, United Kingdom) (represented by: I. Rungg, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: K-2 Corp. (Seattle, United States of America) (represented by: M. Graf, lawyer)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 August 2012 (Case R 1119/2011-4), relating to opposition proceedings between K-2 Corp. and Zoo Sport Ltd.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Zoo Sport Ltd to pay the costs. |