USPTO HABANA BRISA Confusable with HAVANA TAN! for Sun Care Preparations – 2
The parties frame as a threshold question whether it is appropriate to use the English translation of Applicants’ mark a...
商標
USPTO 
USPTO HABANA BRISA Confusable with HAVANA TAN! for Sun Care Preparations – 1
In articulating reasons for reaching a conclusion on the issue of confusion, there is nothing improper in stating that, ...
EUIPO APPLE and OPPLE are visually and aurally smilar at least to an average degree – 6
As regards the concept of ‘taking unfair advantage of the distinctive character or the repute of the trade mark’, also r...
EUIPO APPLE and OPPLE are visually and aurally smilar at least to an average degree – 5
In any case, even if the pronunciation of the beginning of the signs at issue differs on account of letters ‘A’ and ‘O’,...
EUIPO APPLE and OPPLE are visually and aurally smilar at least to an average degree – 4
The specific reputation of the earlier mark – including qualitative aspects, such as a particular image (luxury, lifesty...
EUIPO APPLE and OPPLE are visually and aurally smilar at least to an average degree – 2
The Opposition Division applied the relevant legal standard applicable to short marks (typically reserved for two/three ...
EUIPO APPLE and OPPLE are visually and aurally smilar at least to an average degree – 1
Indeed, according to settled case-law, where a figurative mark containing verbal elements is compared visually to a word...
EUIPO Undistinguishable from the shapes of the same type of goods commonly found in trade – 5
The contested goods mainly target the general public, though they can also target specialised consumers with specific pr...
EUIPO Undistinguishable from the shapes of the same type of goods commonly found in trade – 4
The relevant public is deemed to be reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect. In this respect, ...
EUIPO Undistinguishable from the shapes of the same type of goods commonly found in trade – 3
It should be recalled that, according to settled case-law, novelty or originality are not relevant criteria for assessin...