OPPOSITION No B 2 670 134

Haribo GmbH & Co. KG, Hans-Riegel-Straße 1, 53129 Bonn, Germany (opponent), represented by Alexander Behler, 6, Route de Trèves, EBBC Building E, 2633 Senningerberg, Luxembourg (professional representative)

a g a i n s t

Nordic Cacao Labs OÜ, Põdra tn 30, 10915 Tallinn, Estonia (applicant), represented by Patendibüroo Käosaar OÜ, Tähe 94, 50107 Tartu, Estonia (professional representative).

On 18/10/2016, the Opposition Division takes the following

DECISION:

1. Opposition No B 2 670 134 is rejected as inadmissible.

2. The opposition fee will not be refunded.

REASONS:

The opponent filed an opposition against all the goods of European Union trade mark application No 14 686 621, namely against all the goods in Class 30. The opposition is based on German trade mark registration No 30 519 799. The opponent invoked Article 8(1)(b) EUTMR.

Schokoko
Earlier trade mark	Contested sign

ADMISSIBILITY

According to Rule 15(2)(f) EUTMIR, the notice of opposition shall indicate the goods and services on which the opposition is based.

According to Rule 17(3) EUTMIR, where the opponent submits an incomplete translation, the part of the notice of opposition that has not been translated shall not be taken into account in the examination of admissibility.

In the present case the goods on which the opposition is based have been indicated in a language other than the language of the opposition proceedings. According to Article 119(5) and (6) EUTMR, this information has to be provided in the language of the opposition proceedings, namely English.

According to Rule 17(4) EUTMIR, if the notice of opposition does not comply with the provisions of Rule 15 EUTMIR (other than those referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of Rule 17 EUTMIR), the Office shall inform the opponent accordingly and shall invite him to remedy the deficiencies noted within a period of two months. If the deficiencies are not remedied before this time limit expires, the Office shall reject the opposition as inadmissible.

The Office informed the opponent of the deficiency in its notification dated 15/04/2016. The opponent was given a time limit of two months, until 15/06/2016, to remedy the deficiency, namely to provide a translation of the list of goods into English.

The opponent did not reply within the prescribed time limit.

The opposition must, therefore, be rejected as inadmissible.

Please note that the opposition fee will not be refunded. In accordance with Rule 18(5) EUTMIR, the Office only refunds the opposition fee in view of a withdrawal and/or restriction of the trade mark during the cooling-off period.

The Opposition Division

Sonia MEHANNEK

Benoit VLEMINCQ

Vít MAHELKA

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.