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
EN
(Case C-268/12 P) (<span class="super">1</span>)
(Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(1)(b) - Likelihood of confusion - Word mark ZYDUS - Opposition by the proprietor of the Community trade mark ZIMBUS - Partial refusal of registration by the Board of Appeal of OHIM)
2013/C 225/76
Language of the case: English
Appellant: Cadila Healthcare Ltd (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister)
Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent), Novartis AG (represented by: N. Hebeis, Rechtsanwalt)
Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 March 2012 in Case T-288/08 Cadila Healthcare v OHIM — Novartis (ZYDUS), by which that court dismissed an action brought by the proprietor of the word mark ‘ZYDUS’ for goods in Classes 3, 5 and 10 for annulment of Decision R 1092/2007-2 of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 7 May 2008 rejecting in part the appeal against the decision of the Opposition Division refusing in part registration of that mark in opposition proceedings brought by the proprietor of the Community trade mark ‘ZIMBUS’ for goods in Class 5 — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the goods and signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
1.The appeal is dismissed.
2.Cadila Healthcare Ltd shall pay the costs.
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 258, 25.8.2012.