EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010TJ0161
Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 24 May 2011. # Longevity Health Products, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). # Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark E-PLEX - Earlier national word mark EPILEX - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009. # Case T-161/10.
Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 24 May 2011.
Longevity Health Products, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).
Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark E-PLEX - Earlier national word mark EPILEX - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.
Case T-161/10.
Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 24 May 2011.
Longevity Health Products, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).
Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark E-PLEX - Earlier national word mark EPILEX - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.
Case T-161/10.
European Court Reports 2011 II-00156*
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2011:244
Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 24 May 2011 – Longevity Health Products v OHIM – Tecnifar (E-PLEX)
(Case T-161/10)
Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark E-PLEX – Earlier national word mark EPILEX – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of signs – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
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 – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 39, 43)
Re:
ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 February 2010 (Case R 662/2009‑4), relating to opposition proceedings between Tecnifar – Industria Tecnica Farmaceutica, SA and Longevity Health Products, Inc. |
Information relating to the case
Applicant for the Community trade mark: |
Longevity Health Products, Inc. |
Community trade mark sought: |
Word mark E‑PLEX for goods and services in Classes 3, 5 and 35 – Application No 5126909 |
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: |
Tecnifar – Industria Tecnica Farmaceutica, SA |
Mark or sign cited in opposition: |
Portuguese trade mark registration of the word mark EPILEX for goods in Class 5 |
Decision of the Opposition Division: |
Opposition partially upheld |
Decision of the Board of Appeal: |
Appeal partially dismissed |
Operative part
The Court:
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
2. |
Orders Longevity Health Products, Inc. to pay the costs. |