The General Court of the European Union (“GCEU”), annulling the Board of Appeal (“BOA”) decision, found that L’Oreal’s K K WATER mark is not confusingly similar to Heinze’s earlier K mark. It was not disputed that the hair treatment goods covered by L’Oreal’s K K WATER mark in Class 3 (a sub-brand of its leading house…

Manufacturer of “Mystic Tan” machines failed to show consumers were likely to be confused by salon’s use of its own solution in Mystic Tan booths. The federal district court in Akron, Ohio, did not err in finding that a manufacturer of tanning booths under the mark “Mystic Tan” failed to show a likelihood of success…

In January 2020, Volkswagen (VW, the Opponent) filed an opposition against this trade mark application, alleging a likelihood of confusion with its earlier 3D shape registrations . The Applicant’s mark covered camping vehicles and camping equipment and VW’s earlier marks cover broad vehicle and furniture terms.   The opposition was initially dismissed by the EUIPO…

A decision of the German Federal Patent Court dated 13 September 2021 (Case 26 W (pat) 20/20) shows the sometimes thin line between likelihood of confusion and exploitation of the reputation when earlier reputed marks are involved. The mark MARBO RED was filed as German national mark in relation to liquids and flavors for electronic…

Trial evidence supported the district court’s judgment, blocking registration of VAGISAN in the United States. The federal district court in Alexandria did not err in finding that a German company’s mark VAGISAN used on feminine care products was likely to cause confusion with Combe, Inc.’s VAGISIL brand used on identical and overlapping goods, the U.S….

The first instance court of Barcelona held that that the trade mark device of a dinosaur on a biscuit must remain in the public domain, ruling against the claimant in a trade mark and unfair competition lawsuit (judgement available here, and post here). The Appellate Court (judgement No. 629/2020 of March 23, 2020) has now…

The Swiss Federal Administrative Court (BVGer) had to decide the likelihood of confusion between CRUNCH, a trademark of the Société des produits Nestlé SA and TIFFANY CRUNCH N CREAM, a trademark of the International Foodstuffs Co. LLC (B-6222/2019). Nestlé had failed to cancel the opposed trademark before the Institute for Intellectual Property (IPI) and appealed…

Polish Supreme Court, Civil Chamber, 9 May 2019, Case No. I CSK 263/18 The Polish Supreme Court (Sąd Najwyższy) overturned the judgment of the Warsaw Court of Appeal (case no. I ACa 962/16) on the basis that courts should assess the overall similarity of trademarks, whether it is phonetic, graphical or conceptual. Conceptual differences not…

On 26 September 2018, Division II of the Federal Court of Appeals of the City of Buenos Aires issued a decision in “Re adidas AG v. Juan Carlos Chillemi SRL seeking discontinuance of use and damages” (File No. 5423/2010) confirming the decision of the trial court. adidas owns trademark registrations for the “three-stripes” design in…