Action brought on 8 April 2010 - Colas v OHIM - García-Teresa Gárate (BASE-SEAL)

(Case T -172/10)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties

Applicant: Colas (Boulogne-Billancourt, France) (represented by: E. Logeais, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Rosario García-Teresa Gárate

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

primarily, annul the decision of the Board of Appeal:

-    in so far as it found that there was no similarity between the signs, relying on a distorted representation of the trade mark application at issue and failing, inter alia, to precisely specify the relevant public and to give reasons for the distinctive and dominant character of the terms BASE-SEAL;

-    in so far as it denied all similarity of the signs and consequently rejected the opposition to registration of the trade mark BASE-SEAL in breach of Article 8(1)(b) CTMR; and

in the alternative, partly annul the decision of the Board of Appeal in respect of the sole goods other than 'chemicals used in science, photography, agriculture, horticulture and forestry ... manures, chemical substances for preserving foodstuffs...';

in any event, order the Office to pay all the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Rosario García-Teresa Gárate

Community trade mark concerned: a figurative mark 'BASE-SEAL' for goods in Classes 1, 17 and 19 (Application No 3951464)

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: the applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: several national figurative marks (Spanish, Hungarian, French, Polish, Swedish, German and Czech) and an international figurative mark in the form of a diamond, partly in yellow and containing the word 'Colas' for goods in Classes 1, 19 and 37

Decision of the Opposition Division: rejection of the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark on account of the fact that there is a likelihood of confusion between the conflicting marks

____________