The mark with special typography was applied for the goods listed in classes 6 and 11.
Click here to view image.
The holder of the EU mark MULTILOC is registered for fittings, parts for all the aforesaid goods, included in class 11, (dispensers) for dispensing etc. filed opposition.
The Office rejected the opposition. It was held that the element MULTI of the word composition is not distinctive, as a result there is no likelihood of confusion. The applicant filed request for review.
The Tribunal dismissed this request saying that the dominant elements BOX and BLOC differ visually, phonetically and conceptually. Moreover the mark of the opponent covers a more restricted technical field. These products are bought mainly by specialists, as a result confusion by association can be also excluded.
The appeal was also dismissed by the Metropolitan Court of Appeal. The Court stated that the Tribunal’s opinion was convincing, the difference of the applicant’s mark in respect to the opposed one is sufficient for excluding confusion, moreover appreciation of the list of goods establishes also that there is no likelihood of confusion (8.Pkf.25.008/2015).
It is not surprising that the three instances rejected the opposition, but it is surprising that the opponent was so obstinate.
The examination was traditional: likelihood of confusion of the two marks and degree of similarity of the products figuring in the list of goods. It is evident, that the element MULTI of the word combination was disregarded by all instances.