This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62012CO0341
Mizuno v OHIM
Mizuno v OHIM
Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 21 March 2013 — Mizuno v OHIM
(Case C-341/12 P)
‛Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Community trade mark — Figurative mark including the letter ‘G’ and the two symbols of gender — Opposition by the proprietor of the figurative mark including the letter ‘G’ and the symbol ‘+’ — Refusal of registration by the Board of Appeal’
|
1. |
Appeals — Grounds — Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 26) |
|
2. |
Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community 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 — Criteria for assessment — Composite mark — Determination of the dominant component or components (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 33, 35) |
Re:
Appeal brought against the judgment delivered by the General Court (Fourth Chamber) on 8 May 2012 in Case T-101/11 Mizuno v OHIM — GOLFINO (G), whereby the General Court dismissed the action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 December 2010 (Case R 821/2010-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Mizuno KK and Golfino AG — Figurative sign comprising the letter ‘G’ and the two symbols of gender — Likelihood of confusion with a figurative mark comprising the letter ‘G’ and the symbol ‘+’ — Breach of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Operative part:
|
1. |
The appeal is dismissed. |
|
2. |
Mizuno KK is ordered to pay the costs. |
Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 21 March 2013 — Mizuno v OHIM
(Case C-341/12 P)
‛Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Community trade mark — Figurative mark including the letter ‘G’ and the two symbols of gender — Opposition by the proprietor of the figurative mark including the letter ‘G’ and the symbol ‘+’ — Refusal of registration by the Board of Appeal’
|
1. |
Appeals — Grounds — Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 26) |
|
2. |
Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community 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 — Criteria for assessment — Composite mark — Determination of the dominant component or components (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 33, 35) |
Re:
Appeal brought against the judgment delivered by the General Court (Fourth Chamber) on 8 May 2012 in Case T-101/11 Mizuno v OHIM — GOLFINO (G), whereby the General Court dismissed the action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 December 2010 (Case R 821/2010-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Mizuno KK and Golfino AG — Figurative sign comprising the letter ‘G’ and the two symbols of gender — Likelihood of confusion with a figurative mark comprising the letter ‘G’ and the symbol ‘+’ — Breach of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Operative part:
|
1. |
The appeal is dismissed. |
|
2. |
Mizuno KK is ordered to pay the costs. |