September 18
2020
Trajan Shipley
share
14th September 2020
Data, Tech & IP

New trademark cases before the General Court

Several new actions filed before the General Court concerning trademarks have been officially published:

 

Roxtec v EUIPO — Wallmax (Representation of black circles placed over an orange square)

Roxtec AB, from Sweden, has brought an action for annulment (T-455/20) against the EUIPO’s Second Board of Appeal Decision of 20 April in Case R 2385/2018-2, by which the appellate body cancelled a trademark following a request for a declaration of invalidity. The board did so on the basis of the General Court’s judgment in case T-261/18, which was then upheld by the Court of Justice, in a case involving the same parties, based on the same grounds and relating to a comparable trademark to the one in the present case.

Roxtec challenges the decision on the basis of an alleged infringement of Article 7(1)(e)(ii) of the Trademark Regulation.

Read the officially published application here.

 

Industria de Diseño Textil v EUIPO — Ffauf Italia (ZARA)

Spain’s INDITEX has brought an action for annulment (T-467/20) against the EUIPO’s Fourth Board of Appeal Decision of 8 May in Case R 2040/2019-4, where the board upheld the opposition sought by Flauf Italia SpA in respect of INDITEX’s sought registered word mark ‘ZARA’ for several goods and services and found to be likelihood of confusion between word mark ‘ZARA’ and IR ‘LE DELIZIE ZARA’ for all the contested goods and services.

In support of this action, INDITEX relies on two pleas in law, namely the infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) and 47(2) and (3) of the Trademark Regulation and of Rule 22(3) and (4) of Commission Implementing Regulation 2868/95.

Read the officially published application here.

 

Bigben Connected v EUIPO — Forsee Power (FORCE POWER)

France-based Bibgen Connected seeks the annulment (T-478/20) of EUIPO’s Fifth Board of Appeal Decision of 25 May in Case R 2184/2019-5, where it found that the contested marks ‘FORCE POWER’ and ‘FORSEE POWER’ are similar, as they share phonetic and conceptual similarities, and thus rejected the application for the sought registered mark by Bigben Connected.

In support of this action, Bigben contends that the board infringed Article 8(1)(b) of the Trademark Regulation.

Read the officially published application here.

 

Magnetec v EUIPO (CoolTUBE)

Germany-based Magetec has brought an action for annulment (T-481/20) against the EUIPO’s First Board of Appeal Decision of 15 May in Case R 1755/2019-1, by which the appellate body found that the word mark ‘CoolTUBE’ was likely to be understood as merely informative for the goods applied, and thus lacked a distinctive character.

The applicant submits two pleas in law in support of the action, namely that the Board infringed Articles 7(1)(b) and (c) of the Trademark Regulation.

Read the officially published application here.

×

Your privacy is important for us

We use cookies to improve the user experience. Please review privacy preferences.

I agree

Check our privacy policy and cookies policy.