Now in its twelfth year, Class 46 is dedicated to European trade mark law and practice. This weblog is written by a team of enthusiasts who want to spread the word and share their thoughts with others.
Click here subscribe for free.
Who we all are...
General Court: REVARO v. RECARO
In Case T-349/12, the General Court had to review
the following opposition
|
CTM
Applicant -Rudolf Leiner GmbH |
Opponent-Recaro
Beteiligungs-GmbH |
|
|
RECARO |
|
Class
20 : Furniture, mirrors, picture frames ;goods (not included in other classes)
of wood, cork, reed, cane, wicker, horn, bone, ivory, whalebone, shell,
amber, mother-of-pearl, meerschaum and substitutes for all these materials,
or of plastics |
International
mark registered for Class 20 “furniture¨” |
The OHIM upheld the opposition finding there is a risk of confusion due to the high visual and aural similarity of the marks and the identity between the goods at issue.
The General Court confirmed the OHIM’s decision and
rejected the appeal. Despite the stylization of the applied for trademark, there
is no significant difference for the average relevant consumer from a visual and
aural point of view. There is no possible conceptual comparison. Therefore,
there is a likelihood of confusion according to Article 8 (1) b) CTMR.
Posted by: Laetitia Lagarde @ 22.49
Tags: General court, likelihood of confusion, revaro,recaro,
Sharing on Social Media? Use the link below...Perm-A-Link: https://www.marques.org/blogs/class46?XID=BHA3342
