Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 23 October 2015 — Bonney v OHIM — Bruno (ATHEIST)

(Case T‑714/14)

Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community word mark ATHEIST — Earlier national word mark athé — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

1.                     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 — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 16, 18, 30)

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 — Word marks ATHEIST and athé (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 17, 19, 31)

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 — Similarity of the marks concerned — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 21)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 August 2015 (Case R 803/2013-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Ms Vanessa Bruno and Mr David Bonney.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr David Bonney to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).