Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 30 March 2022 –
SFD v EUIPO – Allmax Nutrition (ALLNUTRITION DESIGNED FOR MOTIVATION)
(Case T‑35/21) (1)
(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark ALLNUTRITION DESIGNED FOR MOTIVATION – Earlier EU word marks ALLMAX NUTRITION – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
1. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 18-20, 80, 86)
2. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 – Determination of the relevant public – Attention level of the public
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see para. 22)
3. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 para. 29)
4. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU 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
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 35, 37, 41, 42, 44, 45, 51, 58)
5. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 – Assessment of the distinctive character of an element of which a trade mark is composed
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 47, 63)
6. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 ALLNUTRITION DESIGNED FOR MOTIVATION and word marks ALLMAX NUTRITION
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 66, 71, 75, 79, 87-89)
7. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 – Weak distinctive character of the earlier mark – Effect
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see para. 85)
Operative part
The Court:
2. | | Orders SFD S.A. to pay the costs. |