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
2011/C 355/44
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Applicant: Maxima Grupė, UAB (Vilnius, Lithuania) (represented by: R. Žabolienė and E. Saukalas, lawyers)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Bodegas Maximo, SL (Oyón, Spain)
—Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 2 August 2011 in case R 1584/2010-4; and
—Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘MAXIMA PREMIUM’, for goods in classes 3, 5, 16, 29, 30, 31, 32 AND 33 — Community trade mark application No 6981443
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 6642284, of the word mark ‘MAXIMO’, for goods in class 33
Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition for all the contested goods
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009 as the Board of Appeal found that there was a likelihood of confusion without taking into account all the relevant aspects of the present case, including inherently low distinctive character of ‘MAXIMO/MAXIMA’, similarity of the signs, and the fact that the relevant public is highly attentive and well informed.