Calvin Klein Trademark Trust v. MOHAMED DAIREK TOUMI

The high degree of similarity of the central element of both signs outweighs the differences that are either of a low degree of distinctiveness or of secondary importance in the overall visual impression of the signs. The dominance of ‘CK in both the earlier signs and the mark applied for creates a significant degree of phonetic overlap. Conceptually, the marks coincide in that they both refer, as their dominant element, to two letters of the alphabet (‘C and ‘K). This coincidence is particularly prevalent as regards the earlier sign ‘CK. Their low degree of distinctiveness or secondary of the he verbal elements ‘CREATION and ‘KIND of the mark applied for explains why, overall, they cannot offset the conceptual similarity between the signs at issue. The highly similar or identical nature of the goods at issue (Classes 3, 4, 8, 9, 14, 16, 18, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 35 and 42), the predominance of ‘CK in all the signs compared, as well as the visual, phonetic and conceptual overlap between the signs, the Board concludes that there is a likelihood of confusion between the marks in the European Union and, particularly, in Ireland. The applicant alleges that the marks ‘CK CHECKER, ‘CK CUIR CONNECTION and CINTURONES CK KEBDANA, have found their way onto the Community Register. The Boards noted that no oppositions were entered against it. Moreover, it is also noteworthy that, unlike in the present case, the letters ‘CK are at the beginning of the mark and are followed by the words ‘CUIR CONNECTION. The appeal is dismissed.