EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62014TA0824
Case T-824/14: Judgment of the General Court of 18 October 2016 — Eveready Battery Company v EUIPO — Hussain and Others (POWER EDGE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark POWER EDGE — Earlier EU word mark EDGE — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 15(1) and 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009)
Case T-824/14: Judgment of the General Court of 18 October 2016 — Eveready Battery Company v EUIPO — Hussain and Others (POWER EDGE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark POWER EDGE — Earlier EU word mark EDGE — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 15(1) and 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009)
Case T-824/14: Judgment of the General Court of 18 October 2016 — Eveready Battery Company v EUIPO — Hussain and Others (POWER EDGE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark POWER EDGE — Earlier EU word mark EDGE — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 15(1) and 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009)
OJ C 441, 28.11.2016, p. 17–18
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
28.11.2016 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 441/17 |
Judgment of the General Court of 18 October 2016 — Eveready Battery Company v EUIPO — Hussain and Others (POWER EDGE)
(Case T-824/14) (1)
((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark POWER EDGE - Earlier EU word mark EDGE - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 15(1) and 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2016/C 441/21)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Eveready Battery Company, Inc. (Saint-Louis, Missouri, United States) (represented by: N. Hebeis, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Garrido Otaola and M. Fischer, acting as Agents)
Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Imran Hussain, Rizwana Hussain, Maariah Hussain, Danyaal Hussain and Zahra Hussain (Leeds, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz, QC)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 October 2014 (Case R 38/2014-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Eveready Battery Company and the Hussains.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Eveready Battery Company, Inc. to pay the costs. |