Begründung Widerspruch gegen (ähnliche) Unionsmarkenanmeldung

EUIPO

Opposition against EUTM-application …....., No. …....., based ... EUTM..... …, Reg.No. …….. 

Opposition No B ……..

These are ... opponent´s observations as well as further facts ... evidence ... support of ... opposition filed ... …………………. …………………………

 

I.

On ........  the  applicant  filed  EUTM-application  No  ……....  to  register  the  trade  mark …..... for goods ... services ... classes ................... ... application was published on…….

The opposition ... directed against all of ... goods ... services covered by ... contested application.

The opposition ... based ... the following earlier right(s):

……………………..  trade  mark ………………….. registration  No  ………………………..filed ... ../../…. ... registered ... ../../…. for goods/services  in class …………………………………….

The opposition ... based ... all of ... goods covered by ... earlier mark.

 

II.

The opponent invokes Article 8 (1) (b) Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 (UTMR).

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

 

1.       The goods ... services

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

The goods ... services ... which ... opposition ... based are ... following:

Class…                                  ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The contested goods ... services are ... following

Class…

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Contested goods/services ... class……..

The contested…………………………………………is identically covered by ... earlier mark. Therefore, these services are indentical.

Contested goods/ services ... class…..

The  contested services ……………………………………………………….are considered ... be similar ... opponent´s ………………………………services.

 

2.       Signs

 

Earlier Trademark

Contested sign

 

(sign)

 

(sign)

Visually, the signs are similar ... the extent that they coincide in…………………………

Aurally, irrespective of ... different pronunciation rules ... different parts of ... relevant territory, ... pronunciation of ... marks coincides ... the syllable………………………..

Conceptually, the words -................and ……………………have a meaning ... <relevant language> ……………..means……………………………………. ... element ………………………in both marks refers to………………………………………………………..

Taking into account ... abovementioned coincides, it ... considered that ... signs under coparison are visually, aurally ... conceptually similar similar for <relevant language> Speakers

 

3.       Distinctive ... dominant elements of ... signs

In determining ... existence of likelihood of confusion, ... comparison of the  conflicting signs must be based ... the overall impression given by ... marks, bearing ... mind, ... particular, their distinctive ... dominant components.

As it ... be perceived as a single element, there ... no single element of ... prior trademark which could easily be considered ... be more distinctive ... dominant (visually: eye-catching) than any other element of ... trademark.

On ... other hand, applicant´s younger trademark consists of at least …….. different Elements, namely ……..

However, ... element……………..in ... contested sign ... easily be associated with ………………………….This  element ... non-distinctive for ... relevant goods/services, since they are all ……………………………related and, therefore, it merely indicates ... generic nature ... type of ... business providing ... goods/services. ... relevant public  understanding ... meaning of that element ... not pay as much attention ... it as ... the other more distinctive elements of ... mark. Consequently, ... impact of this non-distinctive element ... limited when assessing ... likelihood of confusion between ... marks at issue.

The element………………………………… ... the contested sign ... the dominant element as it ... the most eye-catching, given that it ... …………………………………………. than ... other element…………………..

 

4.       Distinctiveness of ... earlier mark

 

The distinctiveness of ... earlier mark ... one of ... factors ... be taken into account in

the global assessment of likelihood of confusion. ... earlier mark is…………………..

 

5.       Relevant public

The average consumer of ... category of products/services concerned ... deemed ... be reasonably well informed ... reasonably observant ... circumspect. It should also be borne ... mind that ... average consumer’s level of attention ... likely ... vary according ... the category of goods ... services ... question. ... the case at hand, ... services are directed both at ... public at large ... at the

professional public. ... level of attention may vary from average ... high.

 

6.       Global assessment, other arguments ... conclusion

 

The assessment below focuses ... the<relevant  language>-speaking part of ... public. ... the

present case, ... goods/services are partly  similar ... partly identical.

Even though there are differences between ... marks these differences are not sufficient to

outweigh ... similarities ... the overall impression given by ... marks.

It has been shown above that ………………………………………………………….

The earlier mark ........ ... reproduced ... its entirety ... the contested sign. Although …………………. does not appear ... the contested mark as a separate element, it nonetheless functions as an independent distinctive element within ... contested sign because ... <relevant  language>-speaking consumer ... dissect ... contested sign into …………….. ... …………………even though it ... written as one word, particularly since it cannot be presumed that …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

However, this must be weighed against ... principle that ... average consumer only rarely has ... chance ... make a direct comparison between ... different marks ... must place his trust ... the imperfect picture of them that he has kept ... his mind (judgment of 22/06/1999, C-342/97, ‘Lloyd Schuhfabrik’). As such, consumers, ... general, tend ... remember similarities rather than dissimilarities between signs. More importantly, there ... a likelihood of confusion because although consumers may not directly confuse ... actual marks themselves, they may, under ... circumstances, believe that ... marks are from ... same undertaking ... economically-linked

undertakings.

 In ... present case, even though ... differences between ... marks are sufficient ... avoid direct confusion between ... marks, there is, ... view of ... similarity between ... services ... the nature of ... industries, where, as mentioned above ... section a), services can be offered by ... same business under sub-brands, a likelihood of confusion.

In this cass, …………………………………………………may be perceived as indicating a particular type or

level of services provided by …………………………………………………………….

Considering all ... above, there ... a likelihood of confusion ... the part of ... public, even ... specialised public.

Therefore, opponent´s prior right …………………………………….. prevails ... the Office ... herewith respectfully requested ... uphold opposition No. ........ ... to deny registration registration of ... contested trademark application  for all ... goods/services against which ... opposition ... to be directed.

 

Das vollständige Dokument können Sie nach dem Kauf sehen, als Word-Dokument (.docx) speichern und bearbeiten.

Jetzt registrieren für Zugang zu allen Dokumenten

Sie haben bereits einen Zugang? Bitte hier einloggen.



Sofort downloaden und anpassen: Alle Verträge können Sie gleich nach dem Kauf in den üblichen Programmen (z.B. Word) bearbeiten und anpassen.

Kompetente Beratung durch unsere Rechtsanwälte: Falls Sie das Dokument oder einen anderen Vertrag bzw. Vorlage anwaltlich anpassen wollen stehen Ihnen unsere Rechtsanwälte gern zur Verfügung. Fragen Sie uns nach einem Kostenvoranschlag!