OPPOSITION No B 2 817 057

Gregory Huau, 6, Chemin de la Mere Dieu, 91310 Montlhery, France (opponent), represented by Aarpi Clairmont Avocats, 9, rue Pierre le Grand, 75008 Paris, France (professional representative)

a g a i n s t

Razor USA LLC, 12723 E. 166th Street, Cerritos, California 90703, United States of America (holder)

On 11/07/2017, the Opposition Division takes the following

DECISION:

1.        Opposition No B 2 817 057 is rejected as inadmissible.

2.        The opposition fee will not be refunded.

REASONS:

The opponent filed an opposition against all the goods of international trade mark registration designating the European Union No 1 291 626, namely those in Classes 12 and 28. The opposition is based on French trade mark registration No 4 231 602. The opponent invoked Article 8(1)(a) and (b) EUTMR.

HOVERTRAX	HOVERTRAX
Opponent’s trade mark	Contested sign

ADMISSIBILITY

According to Article 31 EUTMR, the right of priority shall have the effect that the date of priority shall count as the date of filing of the European Union trade mark application for the purposes of establishing which rights take precedence. The date of priority of an international registration designating the EU has the same effect.

According to Article 8(2)(a) EUTMR, earlier trade marks within the meaning of Article 8(1) EUTMR are those trade marks with a date of application for registration which is earlier than the date of application for registration of the European Union trade mark, taking account, where appropriate, of the priorities claimed in respect of those trade marks.

---

According to Article 41(1)(a) EUTMR, notice of opposition to registration of the trade mark may be given on the grounds that it may not be registered under Article 8 EUTMR by the proprietors of earlier trade marks referred to in Article 8(2) EUTMR, in respect of Article 8(1) and (5) EUTMR.

The opponent filed notice of opposition against the contested international registration designating the European Union. The opposition is based on French trade mark registration No 4 231 602, which was filed on 07/12/2015. The contested international registration designating the European Union was registered on 15/12/2015 with priority of the basic trade mark filed in the United Kingdom on 07/12/2015 under No 3 139 479 for all the goods. Therefore, the contested trade mark has a date of priority which is the same as the filing date of the earlier French trade mark. Consequently, French trade mark registration No 4 321 602 is not an earlier right within the meaning of Article 8(2) EUTMR.

As the opponent’s notice of opposition cited no other rights in support of its opposition, according to Article 31 EUTMR, the right on which the opposition is based is not earlier within the meaning of Article 8(2) EUTMR.

The Office informed the opponent of the deficiency on 20/12/2016 and invited it, after an extension of the time limit, to submit any comments on the matter by 25/04/2017.

The opponent did not reply within the prescribed time limit.

The opposition must therefore be rejected as inadmissible.

Please note that the opposition fee will not be refunded. In accordance with Rule 18(5) EUTMIR, the Office only refunds the opposition fee in view of a withdrawal and/or restriction of the trade mark during the cooling-off period.

The Opposition Division

Ioana MOISESCU

Cynthia DEN DEKKER

Jessica LEWIS

According to Article 59 EUTMR, any party adversely affected by this decision has a right to appeal against this decision. According to Article 60 EUTMR, notice of appeal must be filed in writing at the Office within two months of the date of notification of this decision. It must be filed in the language of the proceedings in which the decision subject to appeal was taken. Furthermore, a written statement of the grounds of appeal must be filed within four months of the same date. The notice of appeal will be deemed to be filed only when the appeal fee of EUR 720 has been paid.