Apple Inc. Vs European Union Intellectual Property Office

DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 08.06.2022
CASE NO: T‑26/21 to T‑28/21
CASE TITLE: Apple Inc. Vs European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
NAME OF HON'BLE COURT: General Court (Sixth Chamber) , Court of Justice of the European Union
NAME OF HON'BLE JUDGE: A. Marcoulli, President, C. Iliopoulos (Rapporteur) and R. Norkus, H. Judges,

Brief Note on the case: 1. The Appeal has been filed by the Applicant namely Apple Inc against order of 4th Chamber, EUIPO. Para 1

2. Three Trademark applications were filed by the Applicant for registration of Trademark THINK DIFFERENT. Para 6

3.The Intervener namely Swatch AG, filed petition seeking revocation of the same. Para 14

4.Vide decision dated 24.08.2018, the cancellation Board revoked the application of the Application. Para 17

5.The Applicant filed appeal against the same before 4th Board. The forth Board also dismissed the Appeal. Para 20

6.Accordingly the subject matter Appeals were filed.

7.The Relevant date for deciding cancellation petition is the date on which cancellation petition were filed. Para 34

8.In cancellation Proceeding, the onus is on the applicant to establish genuine use of mark. Para 60.

9.Genuine use of mark entails whether commercial exploitation is real. Para 63.

10.Statement from legal department of applicant does not have credibility like evidence of third party. Hence are not sufficient to prove user. Para 78.

11.Word THINK DIFFERENT was mentioned on the top of specification, relatively in a smaller font. Hence it can not amount to trademark use. Para 93.

12.Hence the Trademark THINK DIFFERENT was rightly rejected falling under the test of acquired distinctiveness.

Ajay Amitabh Suman, IPR Advocate,
Hon’ble Delhi High Court,
ajayamitabh7@gmail.com,
9990389539