OPPOSITION No B 3 068 705

Felix Solis, S.L., Autovía de Andalucía Km. 199, 13300 Valdepeñas (Ciudad Real), Spain (opponent), represented by José María Sánchez Wolff, Avda/ Cantabria 48, 3ºa, 28042 Madrid, Spain (professional representative)

a g a i n s t

Wine Territory S.R.L., Str. Virgil Madgearu nr.27A, Corp B, parter, Apt.2, Sectorul 1, 014135 Bucuresti, Romania (applicant).

On 09/10/2019, the Opposition Division takes the following

DECISION:

1. Opposition No B 3 068 705 is rejected in its entirety.

2. The opponent bears the costs.

REASONS

The opponent filed an opposition against all the goods of European Union trade mark application No 17 915 420 for the figurative mark . The opposition is based on Danish trade mark registration No VR 2018 01704 for the word mark ‘TT Tempranillo Territory. The opponent invoked Article 8(1)(b) EUTMR.

According to Article 8(1)(b) EUTMR,

Upon opposition by the proprietor of an earlier trade mark, the trade mark applied for shall not be registered:

[…]

(b) if because of its identity with, or similarity to, the earlier trade mark and the identity or similarity of the goods or services covered by the trade marks there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public in the territory in which the earlier trade mark is protected; the likelihood of confusion includes the likelihood of association with the earlier trade mark.

According to Article 8(2)(a)(ii) EUTMR,

For the purposes of paragraph 1, ‘earlier trade marks’ means:

(a) trade marks of the following kinds with a date of application for registration which is earlier than the date of application for registration of the EU trade mark, taking account, where appropriate, of the priorities claimed in respect of those trade marks: … (ii) trade marks registered in a Member State, or, in the case of Belgium, the Netherlands or Luxembourg, at the Benelux Office for Intellectual Property …

For an invoked right to be earlier it must have, in the absence of any priority, an application date that is prior to the day on which the contested application was submitted.

In the present case, the contested application was filed on 08/06/2018 (8^th of June 2018) and the trade mark on which the opposition is based was filed on 11/07/2018 (11^th of July 2018), that is, more than one month later than the filing date of the contested application.

Therefore, the trade mark on which the opposition is based is not earlier according to Article 8(2)(a)(ii) EUTMR and the necessary requirement of Article 8(1)(b) EUTMR is not fulfilled. Therefore, the opposition must be rejected.

COSTS

According to Article 109(7) EUTMR and Article 18(1)(c)(i) EUTMIR, the costs to be paid to the applicant are the costs of representation, which are to be fixed on the basis of the maximum rate set therein. In the present case, the applicant did not appoint a professional representative within the meaning of Article 120 EUTMR and therefore did not incur representation costs.

The Opposition Division

Valeria ANCHINI

Maria SLAVOVA

Michele M. BENEDETTI - ALOISI

According to Article 67 EUTMR, any party adversely affected by this decision has a right to appeal against this decision. According to Article 68 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 for appeal must be filed within four months of the same date. The notice of appeal will be deemed to have been filed only when the appeal fee of EUR 720 has been paid.