This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62020TA0204
Case T-204/20: Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — Zoom v EUIPO — Facetec (ZOOM) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark ZOOM — Earlier EU figurative and word marks ZOOM — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Case T-204/20: Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — Zoom v EUIPO — Facetec (ZOOM) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark ZOOM — Earlier EU figurative and word marks ZOOM — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Case T-204/20: Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — Zoom v EUIPO — Facetec (ZOOM) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark ZOOM — Earlier EU figurative and word marks ZOOM — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
IO C 329, 16.8.2021, p. 22–22
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
16.8.2021 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 329/22 |
Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — Zoom v EUIPO — Facetec (ZOOM)
(Case T-204/20) (1)
(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark ZOOM - Earlier EU figurative and word marks ZOOM - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2021/C 329/27)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Zoom KK (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: M. de Arpe Tejero, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: K. Zajfert, J. Crespo Carrillo and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Facetec, Inc. (Las Vegas, Nevada, United States) (represented by: P. Wilhelm, lawyer)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 February 2020 (Case R 507/2019 1) relating to opposition proceedings between Zoom KK and Facetec.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Zoom KK to pay the costs. |