Appeal – Community trade mark – Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Article 8(1)(b) – International registration designating the European Community – Figurative mark A with two triangular motifs – Earlier national word mark A – Relative grounds for refusal – No likelihood of confusion

1. Appeals – Grounds – Inadequate or contradictory grounds – Admissibility (see para. 35)

2. Appeals – Grounds – Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence – Inadmissibility – Review by the Court of Justice of the assessment of the facts and evidence – Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 41)

3. Appeals – Grounds – Mere repetition of the pleas and arguments put forward before the General Court – Error of law relied on not identified – Inadmissibility (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court, Art. 112(1)(c)) (see para. 46)

4. Appeals – Grounds – Plea submitted for the first time in the context of the appeal – Inadmissibility (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 51) (see para. 58)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 22 September 2011 in Case T-174/10 ara v OHIM — Allrounder (A with two triangular motifs), by which the General Court rejected the action brought for the annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 January 2010 (Case R 481/2009-1), relating to opposition proceedings between ara and Allrounder — Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) — Figurative mark A with two triangular motifs — Opposition by the proprietor of the national word mark ‘A’ — Likelihood of confusion between two marks — Erroneous assessment of distinctive character.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders ara AG to pay the costs.