Дело T-***/**: *****************, Съдебно решение от **.**.2023 г.

Текст

... efusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

In Case T‑227/22,

Cylus Cyber Security Ltd, established in Tel-Aviv (Israel), represented by S. Bailey, lawyer,

applicant,

v

European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agent,

defendant,

the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court, being

Cylance, Inc., established in Irvine, California (United States), represented by B. Levy, lawyer,

THE GENERAL COURT (First Chamber),

composed of D. Spielmann, President, M. Brkan and I. Gâlea (Rapporteur), Judges,

Registrar: V. Di Bucci,

having regard to the written part of the procedure,

having regard to the fact that no request for a hearing was submitted by the parties within three weeks after service of notification of the close of the written part of the procedure, and having decided to rule on the action without an oral part of the procedure, pursuant to Article 106(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court,

gives the following

Judgment

1. By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant, Cylus Cyber Security Ltd, seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 21 February 2022 (Case R 692/2020-4) (‘the contested decision’).

Background to the dispute

2. On 13 February 2018, the applicant, Cylus Cyber Security Ltd, filed an application for registration of an EU trade mark with EUIPO in respect of the word sign CYLUS, pursuant ...