This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62019TA0109
Case T-109/19: Judgment of the General Court of 29 April 2020 — Kerry Luxembourg v EUIPO — Döhler (TasteSense) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark TasteSense — Earlier EU word mark MultiSense — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Case T-109/19: Judgment of the General Court of 29 April 2020 — Kerry Luxembourg v EUIPO — Döhler (TasteSense) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark TasteSense — Earlier EU word mark MultiSense — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Case T-109/19: Judgment of the General Court of 29 April 2020 — Kerry Luxembourg v EUIPO — Döhler (TasteSense) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark TasteSense — Earlier EU word mark MultiSense — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
IO C 209, 22.6.2020, 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)
|
22.6.2020 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 209/26 |
Judgment of the General Court of 29 April 2020 — Kerry Luxembourg v EUIPO — Döhler (TasteSense)
(Case T-109/19) (1)
(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark TasteSense - Earlier EU word mark MultiSense - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2020/C 209/34)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Kerry Luxembourg Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Döhler GmbH (Darmstadt, Germany)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 November 2018 (Case R 1178/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Döhler and Kerry Luxembourg.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Kerry Luxembourg Sàrl to pay the costs. |