Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 7 November 2013 —
Three-N-Products v OHIM — Munindra (AYUR)

(Case T‑63/13)

Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark AYUR — Earlier Benelux word marks AYUS — Likelihood of confusion — Articles 8(1)(b) and 53(1)(a) 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 14, 16, 20, 48, 53)

2.                     Community trade mark — Surrender, revocation and invalidity — Relative grounds for invalidity — Existence of an identical or similar earlier mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Word marks AYUR and AYUS (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 8(1)(b), and 53(1)(a)) (see paras 15, 19, 22, 27, 29‑40, 44‑47, 51‑54)

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 between the goods or services in question — Criteria for assessment — Complementary nature of the goods or services (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 23, 24)

4.                     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 paras 41, 45)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 November 2012 (Case R 2296/2011‑4), relating to opposition proceedings between Munindra Holding BV and Three-N-Products Private Ltd.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Three-N-Products Private Ltd to pay the costs.