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
‘(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark coffee inn — Earlier national figurative mark coffee in — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) of Regulation 2017/1001))’
Language of the case: English
Applicant: UAB Keturi kambariai (Vilnius, Lithuania) (represented by: R. Pumputienė, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Lukošiūtė, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: OÜ Coffee In (Tallinn, Estonia) (represented by: P. Lätt, lawyer)
Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 March 2016 (Case R 137/2015-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Coffee In and Keturi kambariai.
The Court:
1.Dismisses the appeal;
2.Orders UAB Keturi kambariai to pay the costs.
*
Language of the case: English.