This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62020TA0699
Case T-699/20: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Fashion Energy v EUIPO — Retail Royalty (1st AMERICAN) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark 1st AMERICAN — Earlier EU figurative mark representing an eagle or other bird of prey — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Phonetic similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Case T-699/20: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Fashion Energy v EUIPO — Retail Royalty (1st AMERICAN) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark 1st AMERICAN — Earlier EU figurative mark representing an eagle or other bird of prey — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Phonetic similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Case T-699/20: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Fashion Energy v EUIPO — Retail Royalty (1st AMERICAN) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark 1st AMERICAN — Earlier EU figurative mark representing an eagle or other bird of prey — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Phonetic similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
OJ C 95, 28.2.2022, p. 32–32
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
OJ C 95, 28.2.2022, p. 11–11
(GA)
|
28.2.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 95/32 |
Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Fashion Energy v EUIPO — Retail Royalty (1st AMERICAN)
(Case T-699/20) (1)
(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark 1st AMERICAN - Earlier EU figurative mark representing an eagle or other bird of prey - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Phonetic similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2022/C 95/43)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Fashion Energy Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: T. Müller and F. Togo, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Retail Royalty Co. (Las Vegas, Nevada, United States) (represented by: J. Bogatz and Y. Stone, lawyers)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 September 2020 (Case R 426/2020-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Retail Royalty and Fashion Energy.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Fashion Energy Srl to pay the costs. |