I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community word mark Nanolat – Earlier national word mark TANNOLACT – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94
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 (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 49-50)
Re:
ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 October 2006 (Case R 146/2006-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Galderma SA and Mr Tihomir Lelas.
Applicant for the Community trade mark:
Tihomir Lelas
Community trade mark sought:
Word mark Nanolat for goods in Classes 1, 3 and 5 – Application No 3088986
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:
Mark or sign cited in opposition:
German Word mark TANNOLACT for goods in Class 5
Decision of the Opposition Division:
Rejection of the opposition
Decision of the Board of Appeal:
Appeal dismissed
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Galderma SA to pay the costs.