Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 October 2010 – Accenture Global Services v OHIM – Silver Creek Properties (acsensa)
(Case T-244/09)
Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark acsensa – Earlier Community and national word and figurative marks ACCENTURE and accenture – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – No similarity of signs – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) – Duty to state reasons – Article 73 of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 75 of Regulation 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 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 19, 26)
Re:
| ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 March 2009 (Case R 802/2008-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Accenture Global Services GmbH and Silver Creek Properties SA. |
Information relating to the case
Applicant for the Community trade mark: | Silver Creek Properties SA |
Community trade mark sought: | Figurative mark acsensa for goods and services in Classes 9, 35, 36, 38, 41 and 42 |
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: | Accenture Global Services GmbH |
Mark or sign cited in opposition: | German trade mark registration for the word mark ACCENTURE for goods and services in Classes 9, 16, 35 to 37, 41 and 42; German trade mark registration of the figurative mark accenture for goods and services in Classes 9, 16, 35 to 37, 41 and 42; Community trade mark registration of the word mark ACCENTURE for goods and services in Classes 9, 16, 35 to 37, 41 and 42; Community trade mark registration of the figurative mark accenture for goods and services in Classes 9, 16, 35 to 37, 41 and 42 |
Decision of the Opposition Division: | Opposition dismissed in its entirety |
Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Appeal dismissed |
Operative part
The Court:
2. | | Orders Accenture Global Services GmbH to pay the costs. |