Дело T-***/**: *****************, Съдебно решение от **.**.2017 г.

Текст

... l — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Reputation — Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or reputation — Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001))

In Case T‑411/15

PP Gappol Marzena Porczyńska, established in Łódź (Poland), represented by J. Gwiazdowska, lawyer,

applicant,

v

European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by D. Gája, acting as Agent,

defendant,

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

Gap (ITM), Inc., established in San Francisco, California (United States), represented by M. Siciarek and J. Mrozowski, lawyers,

APPEAL against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 May 2015 (Case R 686/2013-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Gap (ITM) and PP Gappol Marzena Porczyńska,

THE GENERAL COURT (Sixth Chamber),

composed of G. Berardis, President, D. Spielmann and Z. Csehi (Rapporteur), judges,

Registrar: I. Dragan, Administrator,

having regard to the application lodged at the Court Registry on 28 July 2015,

having regard to the response of EUIPO lodged at the Court Registry on 5 November 2015,

having regard to the response of the intervener lodged at the Court Registry on 9 December 2015,

having regard to the written questions put by the Court to the applicant and ...