OPPOSITION DIVISION




OPPOSITION No B 2 437 914


MAN Truck & Bus AG, Dachauer Str. 667, 80995 München, Germany (opponent), represented by Röhl - Dehm & Partner, Moritzplatz 6, 86150 Augsburg, Germany (professional representative)


a g a i n s t


Tajfun Planina proizvodnja strojev d.o.o., Planina 41ª, 3225 Planina pri Sevnici, Slovenia (applicant), represented by Dušan Borštar, Nova Ulica 11, 1230 Domžale, Slovenia (professional representative).


On 19/05/2021, the Opposition Division takes the following



DECISION:


1. Opposition No B 2 437 914 is upheld for all the contested goods, namely


Class 7: Tools and machine tools; Electrical hand tools, not included in other classes; Blades and cutting machines; Cutting machines; Sharpening machines; Drills and drilling machines (electric hand tools); Hoists and lifting jacks; Connected and portable parts of machines; Holders for cutting tools (parts of machines); Machine guards; Robots (apparatus); Mechanical handling machines; Anti-friction bearings and guides for machines; Sliding rails (parts of machines); Universal joints (cardan joints); Drums and reels (parts of machines); Holders for machine tools; Frames and bases for machines; Transmissions for machines (other than vehicles); Mechanical hand tools; Agricultural machines and accessories for agricultural machines and parts and fittings therefor, not included in other classes; Forestry machines and accessories for forestry machines and parts and fittings therefore, not included in other classes; Trawl winches; Apparatus for cutting logs and/or wood-splitting machines; Conveyors; Belts for conveyors; Conveying rollers; Chain conveyors; Hydraulic machines, motors and engines; Hydraulic cylinders and pistons therefor; Hydraulic valves (units for the distribution and management of hydraulic media and for hydraulic steering systems); Hydraulic pumps.


Class 8: Blades (hand tools); grips (hand tools).


Class 9: Signalling and checking (supervision) apparatus and instruments; Electrical connections, electric regulating apparatus, electrical switches and switchgear or switchgear assemblies, electric installations for the remote control of industrial processes and work operations, remote control apparatus or remote control units; Units and apparatus for transmitting electronic signals; Automatic time switches, end (limit) switches; Measuring apparatus; Electric measuring instruments, speed or temperature displays or indicators; Balancing apparatus; Personal protective equipment for protection against accidents, including protective helmets, protective masks and protective screens and visors.


Class 12: Vehicles; Apparatus for locomotion by land; Trailers [vehicles]; Passenger and goods lifts; Ski lifts.


2. European Union trade mark application No 13 117 122 is rejected for all the contested goods. It may proceed for the remaining goods.


3. The applicant bears the costs, fixed at EUR 650.



REASONS:


The opponent filed an opposition against some of the goods of European Union trade mark application No 13 117 122, namely against all the goods in Classes 7, 9 and 12 and some of the goods in Class 8. The opposition is based on, inter alia, German trade mark registration No 30 558 220, and the German, French and Austrian company name ‘MAN’. The opponent invoked Article 8(1)(b), 8(5) and 8(4) EUTMR.



ADMISSIBILITY


In the notice of opposition, the opponent indicated that the opposition is directed against part of the goods of the contested mark, namely, besides the goods in Classes 7, 9 and 12, ‘Blades (hand tools); grips (hand tools)’ in Class 8. Subsequently, in its submissions of 08/06/2015, the opponent indicated that it is opposing all the goods in Class 8.


As the opponent opposed only part of the goods in Class 8 within the three-month opposition period, which ended on 28/11/2014, the subsequent indication that all the goods in Class 8 are opposed constitutes an inadmissible extension of the scope of the opposition.


Pursuant to Rule 15(3)(a) EUTMIR, the opposition shall be considered to be directed against all of the goods and services of the application if the opponent does not specify otherwise. However, if the opponent specifies the goods and services it opposes, it must do so clearly and precisely, within the three-month opposition period, in a manner that leaves no doubt about the scope of the opposition. This also follows from the requirement of the adversarial nature of the proceedings and the applicant’s right of defence. The Opposition Division cannot speculate about why the opponent opposed certain goods and not others, and is bound by the relief sought (Article 76(1) EUTMR). It logically follows that including any further goods in the scope of the opposition would qualify as an inadmissible extension of the original scope of the opposition.


Admissibility is not a matter of discretion for the parties or the Office, but has to be examined ex officio, at any stage of the proceedings, irrespective of whether the applicant raises it. Therefore, the Opposition Division can only take into account those goods which have been contested within the opposition period, namely, insofar as Class 8 is concerned, blades (hand tools); grips (hand tools).



LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION – ARTICLE 8(1)(b) EUTMR


A likelihood of confusion exists if there is a risk that the public might believe that the goods or services in question, under the assumption that they bear the marks in question, come from the same undertaking or, as the case may be, from economically linked undertakings. Whether a likelihood of confusion exists depends on the appreciation in a global assessment of several factors, which are interdependent. These factors include the similarity of the signs, the similarity of the goods and services, the distinctiveness of the earlier mark, the distinctive and dominant elements of the conflicting signs and the relevant public.


The opposition is based on more than one earlier trade mark. The Opposition Division finds it appropriate to first examine the opposition in relation to the opponent’s German trade mark registration No 30 558 220.



  1. The goods


The goods on which the opposition is based are the following:


Class 7: Engines (except those for land-based vehicles), internal combustion engines, clutches and devices for transmitting power (except those for land-based vehicles) and their parts and spare parts; printing machines, in particular for web-fed offset for newspaper and illustration printing, for sheet-fed offset, for digital printing, and their parts, machines for plastics processing, in particular for varnishing and for print finishing, folding machines, feed and delivery machines for the printing material, transport and storage machines for printed products, plate bending machines; engines for ships, for on-board power generation and for stationary power plants, in particular two-cycle and four-cycle diesel engines, four-cycle diesel-gas and gas Otto engines and their parts, in particular mixed-fuel devices (machines), shafts, gear mechanisms, clutches; ships' machines; power generators; handheld tools (not hand-operated) for the maintenance of engines; exhaust turbochargers and turbines (except those for land-based vehicles) and their parts; transmissions for vehicles (except for land-based vehicles); land-based and floating power plants comprising diesel and diesel-gas engines; compressors and turbines, included in this class, in particular axial compressors, radial compressors, process-gas turbines, radial expanders; machine sets assembled from the aforementioned turbines and compressors; process-gas screw compressors, included in this class, screw expanders, included in this class, industrial steam turbines, industrial gas turbines, except turbines for land-based vehicles; power production machines, assembled from the aforementioned compressors and turbines; gear mechanisms (except for land-based vehicles), in particular industrial gear mechanisms for cement and petrochemical plants, for the plastics and steel industry, for wind energy; spur and planetary gear mechanisms for turbo machines; ships' gear mechanisms with diesel engine and/or turbine drive; sliding bearings (machine parts), in particular for electric machines, blowers, compressors, pumps, ships; machines for the chemical industry, in particular reactors for catalytic gas-phase reactions; hydrotreaters (machines for pre-treating liquid media), machines for the physical sector, namely exothermic and endothermic processes, in particular gasphase processes; cranes; tower cranes, in particular with trolley or tilting jibs, bottom-slewing quick-erection cranes; machine tools; conveying machines, in particular for piece goods; gear mechanisms for electronic machines; excavators, bucket-wheel and bucket-chain excavators; drive machines (except those for land-based vehicles); appropriate apparatus and structures, included in this class for industrial machines; machines and structures, included in this class, for space travel centres; (controllable) clutches for industrial machines and ships; sliding bearings and torque converters for industrial machines; packaging machines for printed products.


Class 9: Fire extinguishers, firefighting vehicles; electrical apparatus for conducting, switching, converting, storing, regulating, controlling and monitoring electricity, in particular for the remote control of industrial operations; electronic publications (downloadable); electrical and electronic control, regulating, switching, monitoring, indicating and information input and output devices; process computers and computer programs and software installed on data storage media for this process, in each case in particular for utility vehicles, printing machines, diesel engines, turbo machines; computer programs and data storage media in the field of engineering, in particular for the construction, work preparation and fabrication of mechanical products; monitoring apparatus and instruments and monitoring devices assembled therefrom for compressors and turbines and for power generation plants; electrical machine regulating, protective and monitoring apparatus for machines; material testing instruments and machines for drive engineering for vehicles, air travel and railway engineering; remote control devices; particle accelerators.


Class 12: Heavy goods vehicles and their parts; omnibuses with diesel, gas, hydrogen or electric drive and their parts; special vehicles, in particular platform trucks, tippers or saddle tractors and their parts; drive machines, namely all-wheel-drive for land-based vehicles; engines for land-based vehicles, in particular gas/diesel engines; chassis, also suitable for off-road use, for vehicles; bodywork and frame parts for motor vehicles; gear mechanisms for land-based vehicles, in particular chain-driven vehicle mechanisms; (controllable) clutches for rail-bound vehicles, gear wheels (except engine parts), (controllable) clutches, sliding bearings, and torque converters for land-based vehicles, water-borne craft; structures for space vehicles; high-speed diesel engines for land-based vehicles, in particular for locomotives; ships' propellers; transport caterpillars.


The contested goods are the following:


Class 7: Tools and machine tools; Electrical hand tools, not included in other classes; Blades and cutting machines; Cutting machines; Sharpening machines; Drills and drilling machines (electric hand tools); Hoists and lifting jacks; Connected and portable parts of machines; Holders for cutting tools (parts of machines); Machine guards; Robots (apparatus); Mechanical handling machines; Anti-friction bearings and guides for machines; Sliding rails (parts of machines); Universal joints (cardan joints); Drums and reels (parts of machines); Holders for machine tools; Frames and bases for machines; Transmissions for machines (other than vehicles); Mechanical hand tools; Agricultural machines and accessories for agricultural machines and parts and fittings therefor, not included in other classes; Forestry machines and accessories for forestry machines and parts and fittings therefore, not included in other classes; Trawl winches; Apparatus for cutting logs and/or wood-splitting machines; Conveyors; Belts for conveyors; Conveying rollers; Chain conveyors; Hydraulic machines, motors and engines; Hydraulic cylinders and pistons therefor; Hydraulic valves (units for the distribution and management of hydraulic media and for hydraulic steering systems); Hydraulic pumps.


Class 8: Blades (hand tools); grips (hand tools).

Class 9: Signalling and checking (supervision) apparatus and instruments; Electrical connections, electric regulating apparatus, electrical switches and switchgear or switchgear assemblies, electric installations for the remote control of industrial processes and work operations, remote control apparatus or remote control units; Units and apparatus for transmitting electronic signals; Automatic time switches, end (limit) switches; Measuring apparatus; Electric measuring instruments, speed or temperature displays or indicators; Balancing apparatus; Personal protective equipment for protection against accidents, including protective helmets, protective masks and protective screens and visors.


Class 12: Vehicles; Apparatus for locomotion by land; Trailers [vehicles]; Passenger and goods lifts; Ski lifts.


An interpretation of the wording of the list of goods is required to determine the scope of protection of these goods.


The terms ‘in particular’ and ‘including’, used both in the applicant’s and in the opponents list of goods, indicate that the specific goods are only examples of items included in the category and that protection is not restricted to them. In other words, they introduce a non-exhaustive list of examples (see the judgment of 09/04/2003, T‑224/01, Nu‑Tride, EU:T:2003:107).


However, the term ‘namely’, used in the opponents list of goods to show the relationship of individual goods and services with a broader category, is exclusive and restricts the scope of protection only to the specifically listed goods.


As a preliminary remark, it is to be noted that according to Article 28(7) EUTMR, goods or services shall not be regarded as being similar or dissimilar to each other on the ground that they appear in the same or different classes under the Nice Classification.


The relevant factors relating to the comparison of the goods or services include, inter alia, the nature and purpose of the goods or services, the distribution channels, the sales outlets, the producers, the method of use and whether they are in competition with each other or complementary to each other.


Contested goods in Class 7


The contested tools and electrical hand tools, not included in other classes; mechanical hand tools include, as broader categories, or overlap with, the opponent’s handheld tools (not hand-operated) for the maintenance of engines. Since the Opposition Division cannot dissect ex officio the broad categories of the contested goods, they are considered identical to the opponent’s goods.


Machine tools are identically included in the specifications of both marks.


The contested blades; holders for cutting tools (parts of machines); holders for machine tools and the opponent’s machine tools can have the same producers and end users. Furthermore, they are complementary. Therefore, they are considered to be similar.


The contested cutting machines; sharpening machines; mechanical handling machines; hoists and lifting jacks; robots (apparatus); trawl winches; hydraulic machines overlap with the opponent’s machines and structures, included in this class, for space travel centres. Therefore, they are identical.

The contested drills and drilling machines (electric hand tools) are included in the opponent’s machine tools. Therefore, they are considered identical.

The contested connected and portable parts of machines; machine guards; include, as broader categories, the opponent’s their parts [printing machines, in particular for web-fed offset for newspaper and illustration printing, for sheet-fed offset, for digital printing]. Since the Opposition Division cannot dissect ex officio the broad categories of the contested goods, they are considered identical to the opponent’s goods.


The contested anti-friction bearings and guides for machines; sliding rails (parts of machines) overlap with the opponent’s sliding bearings (machine parts), in particular for electric machines, blowers, compressors, pumps, ships. Therefore, these goods are considered to be identical.


The contested universal joints (cardan joints); drums and reels (parts of machines); transmissions for machines (other than vehicles); hydraulic cylinders and pistons therefor; hydraulic valves (units for the distribution and management of hydraulic media and for hydraulic steering systems); hydraulic pumps overlap with the opponent’s their parts and spare parts [engines (except those for land-based vehicles), internal combustion engines, clutches and devices for transmitting power (except those for land-based vehicles)]. Therefore, these goods are considered identical.


Frames and bases for machines; apparatus for cutting logs and/or wood-splitting machines overlap with the opponent’s appropriate apparatus and structures, included in this class for industrial machines. It is, therefore, considered that these goods are identical.


The contested agricultural machines and accessories for agricultural machines and parts and fittings therefor, not included in other classes; forestry machines and accessories for forestry machines and parts and fittings therefore, not included in other classes include conveyors for agricultural and horticultural machinery and accessories, parts and fittings therefor. It follows that the contested agricultural and forestry machines overlap with the opponent’s conveying machines, in particular for piece goods, whereas their respective accessories and parts and fittings therefor, not included in other classes can have the same producers and end users and are, furthermore, complementary. The contested goods are, therefore, identical or, respectively, similar.


The contested conveyors are synonymous to the opponent’s conveying machines, in particular for piece goods, whereas the contested conveying rollers; chain conveyors are included in these goods covered by the earlier mark. Therefore, they are identical.


The contested belts for conveyors can have the same producers and end users as the opponent’s conveying machines, in particular for piece goods and are, moreover, complementary to them. Therefore, they are considered similar.


The contested hydraulic motors overlap with the opponent’s internal combustion engines, clutches and devices for transmitting power (except those for land-based vehicles). Therefore, these goods are considered to be identical.


The contested hydraulic engines overlap with the opponent’s engines (except those for land-based vehicles). Therefore, these goods are identical.


Contested goods in Class 8


The opponent’s machine tools in Class 7 include a large variety of power-driven machines, such as cutting machines and wire pulling grips. The contested blades (hand tools) and grips (hand tools) can have the same purpose as the opponent’s machine tools, the same producers, end users and distribution channels. Therefore, it is considered that these goods are similar.


Contested goods in Class 9


The contested signalling and checking (supervision) apparatus and instruments; units and apparatus for transmitting electronic signals; measuring apparatus; electric measuring instruments, speed or temperature displays or indicators; balancing apparatus overlap with the opponent’s electrical and electronic control, regulating, switching, monitoring, indicating and information input and output devices. Therefore, these goods are identical.


The contested electrical connections, electric regulating apparatus, electrical switches and switchgear or switchgear assemblies, electric installations for the remote control of industrial processes and work operations; automatic time switches, end (limit) switches are included in or overlap with the opponent’s electrical apparatus for conducting, switching, converting, storing, regulating, controlling and monitoring electricity, in particular for the remote control of industrial operations. The goods are, therefore, identical.


The contested remote control apparatus or remote control units are included in the opponent’s remote control devices. The goods are identical.


The contested personal protective equipment for protection against accidents, including protective helmets, protective masks and protective screens and visors and the opponent’s fire extinguishers have the same purpose of protecting one’s life and physical integrity. Moreover, they are often manufactured by the same enterprise. Therefore, it is considered that these goods are similar.


Contested goods in Class 12


The contested vehicles; apparatus for locomotion by land; trailers [vehicles] overlap with the opponent’s heavy goods vehicles and their parts. Therefore, these goods are considered to be identical.


The contested passenger and goods lifts; ski lifts overlap with the opponent’s special vehicles, in particular platform trucks, tippers or saddle tractors and their parts. Therefore, they are identical.



  1. Relevant public — degree of attention


The average consumer of the category of products concerned is deemed to be reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect. It should also be borne in mind that the average consumer’s degree of attention is likely to vary according to the category of goods or services in question.


In the present case, most of the goods found to be identical or similar are rather specialised goods directed at business customers with specific professional knowledge or expertise, while some of them are directed at the public at large. The degree of attention is expected to vary from average for mass consumption goods (e.g. blades in Class 8) to high for highly specialised goods, and those that can have a considerable impact on the consumer’s health or finances (e.g. agricultural machines in Class 7, personal protective equipment for protection against accidents in Class 9, vehicles in Class 12).



  1. The signs



MAN


TAJFUNMAN



Earlier trade mark


Contested sign


The relevant territory is Germany.


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).


Both marks are word marks, and as such, they do not have elements that could be considered more dominant (visually eye-catching) than other elements.


The Court has held that, although the average consumer normally perceives a mark as a whole and does not proceed to analyse its various details, the fact remains that, when perceiving a word sign, they will break it down into elements which, for them, suggest a specific meaning or which resemble words known to them (judgment of 13/02/2007, T-256/04, Respicur, EU:T:2007:46, § 57).


This applies to the case at hand, since the word ‘TAJFUN’ is very close to the German equivalent ‘Taifun’, meaning a tropical storm, esp. in East Asia (see: http://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/Taifun), and the word ‘MAN’ is a very basic English word, which is understood by the relevant public as meaning an adult of the male sex (see: http://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/Mann_Person_Gatte_Anrede).


Moreover, the term ‘TAJFUNMAN’ as such does not exist, and the contested sign as a whole has no clear and graspable meaning. There is no such creature as a ‘tajfunman’ or ‘typhoon man’. The applicant claims that the term has a similar meaning as the words ‘Superman’ or ‘Spiderman’. Whereas the latter are commonly known superheroes, the Opposition Division is not aware of any such superhero by the name of ‘Tajfunman’. While it cannot be excluded that a part of the relevant consumers would associate the contested mark with a superhero whose superpower is the initiation of tropical storms, the meanings of the two terms making up the contested sign will be perceived individually by a substantial part of the relevant consumers.


Taking into account the goods at hand, neither of the marks has any elements that could be considered clearly more distinctive than other elements.


Visually, the signs coincide in the element ‘MAN’, which constitutes the entire earlier mark and is fully included in the contested sign. They differ in the additional element ‘TAJFUN’ of the contested sign.


While it is true that consumers generally tend to focus on the first element of a sign when being confronted with a trade mark, the common element ‘MAN’ will be noticed by consumers in the contested sign and, moreover, will be seen as a stand-alone term by a substantial part of the relevant public, for the reasons explained above.


The signs are visually similar to a low degree.


Aurally, the pronunciation of the signs coincides in the syllable ‛MAN’, present identically in both signs. The pronunciation differs in the syllables ‛TAJ-FUN’ of the contested mark, which have no counterparts in the earlier sign.


Since the signs coincide in one out of the three syllables of the contested sign, which will be perceived by consumers as a stand-alone term, the signs are aurally similar to an average degree.


Conceptually, the public in the relevant territory will perceive the earlier sign and the element ‘MAN’ of the contested sign as an adult of the male sex. The element ‘TAJFUN’ of the contested sign will be perceived as a tropical storm, esp. in East Asia. As the meanings of the two elements making up the contested sign will be perceived individually by the relevant public, and since one of these elements constitutes the earlier mark, the signs are, overall, conceptually similar to an average degree.


As the signs have been found similar in at least one aspect of the comparison, the examination of likelihood of confusion will proceed.



  1. 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.


According to the opponent, the earlier mark has been extensively used and enjoys an enhanced scope of protection. However, for reasons of procedural economy, the evidence filed by the opponent to prove this claim does not have to be assessed in the present case (see below in ‘Global assessment’).


Consequently, the assessment of the distinctiveness of the earlier mark will rest on its distinctiveness per se. In the present case, the earlier trade mark as a whole has no meaning for any of the goods in question from the perspective of the public in the relevant territory. Therefore, the distinctiveness of the earlier mark must be seen as normal.



  1. Global assessment, other arguments and conclusion


The Court has stated that likelihood of confusion must be appreciated globally, taking into account all the factors relevant to the circumstances of the case; this appreciation depends on numerous elements and, in particular, on the degree of recognition of the mark on the market, the association that the public might make between the two marks and the degree of similarity between the signs and the goods and services (judgment of 11/11/1997, C-251/95, Sabèl, EU:C:1997:528, § 22).


Taking into account the identity and similarity of the goods at issue and the average degree of aural and conceptual similarity between the signs, and in particular, the fact that a substantial part of the relevant public will perceive the terms ‘TAJFUN’ and ‘MAN’ individually in the contested sign, consumers may be led to believe that the goods at issue originate from the same undertaking or at least economically linked undertakings, since the consumer could perceive the contested sign as identifying a particular range of goods of the opponent. This applies notwithstanding the fact that the signs are visually similar to a low degree only and that the consumer’s degree of attention might be high in relation to some of those goods.


The applicant’s claim that it has registered and used numerous ‘TAJFUN’ trademarks is of no relevance to the present case. First, that mark is not the contested mark, and second, the right to an EUTM begins on the date when the EUTM is filed and not before, and from that date on the EUTM has to be examined with regard to opposition proceedings.


Therefore, when considering whether or not the EUTM falls under any of the relative grounds for refusal, events or facts which happened before the filing date of the EUTM are irrelevant because the rights of the opponent, insofar as they predate the EUTM, are earlier than the applicant’s EUTM.


Considering all the above, there is a likelihood of confusion, including a likelihood of association, on the part of the public.


Therefore, the opposition is well founded on the basis of the opponent’s German trade mark registration No 30 558 220. It follows that the contested trade mark must be rejected for all the contested goods.


Since the opposition is successful on the basis of the inherent distinctiveness of the earlier mark, there is no need to assess the enhanced degree of distinctiveness of the opposing mark due to its reputation as claimed by the opponent. The result would be the same even if the earlier mark enjoyed an enhanced degree of distinctiveness.


As the earlier German trade mark leads to the success of the opposition and to the rejection of the contested trade mark for all the goods against which the opposition was directed, there is no need to examine the other earlier rights invoked by the opponent (16/09/2004, T‑342/02, Moser Grupo Media, S.L., EU:T:2004:268).


Since the opposition is fully successful on the basis of the ground of Article 8(1)(b) EUTMR, there is no need to further examine the other grounds of the opposition, namely Article 8(4) and Article 8(5) EUTMR.



COSTS


According to Article 85(1) EUTMR, the losing party in opposition proceedings must bear the fees and costs incurred by the other party.


Since the applicant is the losing party, it must bear the opposition fee as well as the costs incurred by the opponent in the course of these proceedings.


According to Rule 94(3) and (6) and Rule 94(7)(d)(i) EUTMIR, the costs to be paid to the opponent are the opposition fee and the costs of representation which are to be fixed on the basis of the maximum rate set therein.




The Opposition Division


Janja FELC


Natascha GALPERIN

Reiner SARAPOGLU



According to Article 59 EUTMR, any party adversely affected by this decision has a right to appeal against this decision. According to Article 60 EUTMR, notice of appeal must be filed in writing at the Office within two months of the date of notification of this decision. It must be filed in the language of the proceedings in which the decision subject to appeal was taken. Furthermore, a written statement of the grounds of appeal must be filed within four months of the same date. The notice of appeal will be deemed to be filed only when the appeal fee of EUR 720 has been paid.


The amount determined in the fixation of the costs may only be reviewed by a decision of the Opposition Division on request. According to Rule 94(4) EUTMIR, such a request must be filed within one month from the date of notification of this fixation of costs and shall be deemed to be filed only when the review fee of EUR 100 (Annex I A(33) EUTMR) has been paid.


Latest News

  • FEDERAL CIRCUIT AFFIRMS TTAB DECISION ON REFUSAL
    May 28, 2021

    For the purpose of packaging of finished coils of cable and wire, Reelex Packaging Solutions, Inc. (“Reelex”) filed for the registration of its box designs under International Class 9 at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”).

  • THE FOURTH CIRCUIT DISMISSES NIKE’S APPEAL OVER INJUNCTION
    May 27, 2021

    Fleet Feet Inc, through franchises, company-owned retail stores, and online stores, sells running and fitness merchandise, and has 182 stores, including franchises, nationwide in the US.

  • UNO & UNA | DECISION 2661950
    May 22, 2021

    Marks And Spencer Plc, Waterside House, 35 North Wharf Road, London W2 1NW, United Kingdom, (opponent), represented by Boult Wade Tennant, Verulam Gardens, 70 Grays Inn Road, London WC1X 8BT, United Kingdom (professional representative)