This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62018TA0389
Case T-389/18: Judgment of the General Court of 20 June 2019 — Nonnemacher v EUIPO — Ingram (WKU) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark WKU — Earlier EU word marks WKA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — No limitation in consequence of acquiescence — Article 61(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Case T-389/18: Judgment of the General Court of 20 June 2019 — Nonnemacher v EUIPO — Ingram (WKU) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark WKU — Earlier EU word marks WKA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — No limitation in consequence of acquiescence — Article 61(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Case T-389/18: Judgment of the General Court of 20 June 2019 — Nonnemacher v EUIPO — Ingram (WKU) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark WKU — Earlier EU word marks WKA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — No limitation in consequence of acquiescence — Article 61(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
OJ C 305, 9.9.2019, pp. 51–52
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
9.9.2019 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 305/51 |
Judgment of the General Court of 20 June 2019 — Nonnemacher v EUIPO — Ingram (WKU)
(Case T-389/18) (1)
(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark WKU - Earlier EU word marks WKA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - No limitation in consequence of acquiescence - Article 61(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2019/C 305/61)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Klaus Nonnemacher (Karlsruhe, Germany) (represented by: C. Zierhut, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Paul Ingram (Birmingham, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. Haberl, lawyer)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 April 2018 (Case R 399/2017-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Mr Ingram and Mr Nonnemacher.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Mr Klaus Nonnemacher to pay the costs. |