Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 29 January 2013 — Müller v OHIM — Loncar (Sunless)
(Case T‑662/11)
Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark Sunless — Earlier Community word marks SUNLESS and LONCAR-SUNLESS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
1. Community trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Modification of the terms of the dispute as brought before the Board of Appeal — Not permissible (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 135(4); Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65) (see para. 16)
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 — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Assessment of the likelihood of confusion — Criteria (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 25-28)
3. 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 — Earlier mark consisting of a Community trade mark — Refusal to register on a ground relating to refusal even limited to part of the Union (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 29, 30)
4. 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 — Figurative mark Sunless — Word marks SUNLESS and LONCAR-SUNLESS (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 31-34, 39-44, 50, 51, 54-56, 60-64, 67-76, 78-84)
5. 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 between the goods or services in question — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 37, 38)
6. 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 — Complex mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 45-47, 59, 65, 66)
Re:
| ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 September 2011 (Case R 2508/2010‑2), relating to opposition proceedings between Loncar, SL and Mr Thomas Müller. |
Operative part
The Court:
2. | | Orders Thomas Müller to pay the costs. |