Дело T-***/**: *****************, Съдебно решение от **.**.2025 г.

Текст

... e ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 )

In Case T‑298/24,

DoDo Services s. r. o., established in Prague (Czech Republic), represented by J. Matzner, lawyer,

applicant,

v

European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by E. Markakis, acting as Agent,

defendant,

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

doqo, established in Paris (France), represented by D. Huart, lawyer,

THE GENERAL COURT (Sixth Chamber),

composed of M.J. Costeira, President, M. Kancheva and P. Zilgalvis (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, DoDo Services s. r. o., seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 15 April 2024 (Case R 1921/2023‑2) (‘the contested decision’).

Background to the dispute

2. On 7 February 2022, the intervener, doqo, filed an application for registration of an EU trade mark with EUIPO for the following figurative sign:

...