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
2014/C 409/76
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: P. González-Bueno Catalán de Ocón, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Sinda Poland Corporation Sp. z o.o. (Warsaw, Poland)
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—Annul the decision issued on 14 September 2012 (Case R 2214/2013-5) on the grounds that Article 8(1)(b) CTMR was not correctly applied, which resulted in the incorrect finding that the conflicting trade marks were not visually and conceptually similar;
—Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) and Sinda Poland Corporation Sp. z.o.o. to pay the costs of the proceedings before the General Court and the Office.
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark containing the representation of an imaginary animal for goods in class 25 — Community trade mark application No 1 1 1 42 395
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant
Mark or sign cited in opposition: The international registrations Nos 3 69 075 and 4 80 105 for goods in classes 18, 25 and 28, and the international registration No 5 93 987 for goods and services in all classes
Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Rejected the appeal
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009