Action brought on 1 February 2012 - Chrysamed Vertrieb v OHIM - Chrysal International (Chrysamed)

(Case T-46/12)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Chrysamed Vertrieb GmbH (Salzburg, Austria) (represented by: T. Schneider, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Chrysal International B.V. (Naarden, Netherlands)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

uphold the action, annul the decision of the Board of Appeal of 22 November 2011 in Case R 0064/2011-1 and reject the opposition against the application for the Community trade mark;

order OHIM or the potential intervener to pay the costs pursuant to Article 87(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark 'Chrysamed' for goods in Class 5 (application No 6 387 071)

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Chrysal International B.V.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the international word mark 'CHRYSAL' for goods in Classes 1, 5 and 31 (trade mark No 645 337), the international word mark 'CHRYSAL' for goods in Class 1 (trade mark No 144 634) and the international figurative mark 'CHRYSAL' for goods in Classes 1, 3, 5 and 31 (trade mark No 877 785)

Decision of the Opposition Division: the opposition was upheld

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 as there is no likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue

____________