Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 22 March 2023 –
adp Merkur v EUIPO – psmtec (SEVEN SEVEN 7)
(Case T‑408/22) (1)
(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark SEVEN SEVEN 7 – Earlier EU word mark Seven – Relative grounds for refusal – Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – No genuine use – Article 47(2) of Regulation 2017/1001)
1. EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Concept – Criteria for assessment
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2))
(see paragraphs 15, 17-19)
2. EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Burden of proof incumbent on the proprietor
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2))
(see paragraph 16)
3. EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Concept – Criteria for assessment – Requirement of solid and objective evidence
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2))
(see paragraph 20)
4. EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Word mark Seven
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2))
(see paragraphs 33, 35-40)
Operative part
The Court:
2. | | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |