Decision on Opposition No B 2 801 424 page: 3 of 5
The global appreciation of the visual, aural or conceptual similarity of the marks in
question must be based on the overall impression given by the marks, bearing in
mind, in particular, their distinctive and dominant components (11/11/1997, C-251/95,
Sabèl, EU:C:1997:528, § 23).
The unitary character of the European Union trade mark means that an earlier
European Union trade mark can be relied on in opposition proceedings against any
application for registration of a European Union trade mark that would adversely
affect the protection of the first mark, even if only in relation to the perception of
consumers in part of the European Union (18/09/2008, C-514/06 P, Armafoam,
EU:C:2008:511, § 57). This applies by analogy to international registrations
designating the European Union. Therefore, a likelihood of confusion for only part of
the relevant public of the European Union is sufficient to reject the contested
The letter string ATTIMO is present in both marks, and is meaningful in certain
territories, for example in those countries where Italian is understood. Consequently,
the Opposition Division finds it appropriate to focus the comparison of the signs on
the Italian-speaking part of the public.
The earlier mark ATTIMO will be understood as ‘a moment’ (08/11/2017, extracted
from Collins Italian-English Dictionary on www.collinsdictionary.com) by the relevant
Italian speaking public. In contrast with the applicant’s argument, as it is not
descriptive, allusive or otherwise weak for the relevant goods, it is distinctive.
The contested mark NATTIMO as such has no meaning in Italian. However, it cannot
be excluded, as claimed by the applicant, that part of the public will perceive it as a
misspelling of a colloquial words (U)N ATTIMO, with the meaning of ‘(in) a moment’
(08/11/2017, extracted from Collins Italian-English Dictionary on
Visually and aurally, the signs coincide in the letter string ATTIMO. However, they
differ in the first letter N, and the sound of that letter when pronounced, in the
Therefore, the signs are visually and aurally similar to an average degree.
Conceptually, reference is made to the previous assertions concerning the semantic
content conveyed by the marks. As both signs will be perceived as referring to a
similar concept of a ‘moment’ by part of the public, the signs are conceptually similar
to an average degree for that public. For the remaining public that perceives no
meaning in the contested mark, the signs are not conceptually similar.
As the signs have been found similar in at least one aspect of the comparison, the
examination of likelihood of confusion will proceed.
d) Distinctiveness of the earlier mark
The distinctiveness of the earlier mark is one of the factors to be taken into account
in the global assessment of likelihood of confusion.
The opponent did not explicitly claim that its mark is particularly distinctive by virtue
of intensive use or reputation.