Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 22 January 2010 – ecoblue v OHIM
(Case C‑23/09P)
Appeal – Community trade mark – Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Article 8(1)(b) – Earlier mark BLUE – Word sign ‘Ecoblue’ – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of the signs
1.Appeals – Grounds – Mistaken assessment of the facts – Inadmissibility – Review by the Court of Justice of the assessment of the evidence – Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 51)
2.Appeals – Grounds – Mere repetition of the pleas and arguments put forward before the General Court – Error of law relied on not identified – Inadmissibility (Art. 256(1) TFUE; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 112(1), first para., (c)) (see paras 41-42)
3.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 para. 39)
4.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 – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 47)
Re:
| Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) of 12 November 2008 in Case T-281/07 | ecoblue | v | OHIM | by which the Court of First Instance dismissed an action brought by the applicant for the word mark ‘Ecoblue’ for services in Classes 35, 36 and 38 against Decision R 844/2006-1 of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 25 April 2007 dismissing the appeal brought against the decision of the Opposition Division which refused registration of that mark in the context of the opposition brought by the proprietor of the Community word mark ‘BLUE’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 36 and 38, and of other Community word marks containing the word ‘BLUE’. |
Operative part
1. |
| The appeal is dismissed. |
2. |
| ecoblue AG is ordered to pay the costs. |