Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark ZUFAL - Earlier Community word mark ZURCAL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Similarity of the goods - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Restriction of the goods designated in the trade mark application - Article 43(1) of Regulation No 207/2009.

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 July 2011 – ratiopharm v OHIM – Nycomed (ZUFAL) (Case T-222/10) Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark ZUFAL – Earlier Community word mark ZURCAL – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of the signs – Similarity of the goods – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Restriction of the goods designated in the trade mark application – Article 43(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 19-20, 44) Re: ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 12 March 2010 (Case R 874/2008-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Nycomed GmbH and ratiopharm GmbH. Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders ratiopharm GmbH to pay the costs.