Trade mark decision

BL Number

O/342/99

Decision date

7 October 1999

Hearing Officer

Mr G Salthouse

Mark

PACLINC

Classes

35

Applicants

Paclinc (Europe) Ltd

Opponents

Linpac Group Limited

Opposition

Sections 3(1), 3(6) 5(2), 5(3) and 5(4).

Result

Sections 3(1) & 3(6) - Opposition failed. No evidence filed in support of these grounds.

Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed. Respective marks not confusingly similar.

Sections 5(3) & 5(4) - Opposition failed. Respective marks not confusingly similar.

Points Of Interest

• None.

Summary

Opponents opposition based on ownership and of a number of registered LINPAC marks in Classes 6, 7, 12, 16, 20 & 21 (but not Class 35). However, opponents also filed evidence to show extensive use of their mark in relation to packaging and also claimed that they offered advisory services as included within Class 35.

Essential ground of opposition considered to be 5(2)(b). Opponents goods and applicants services found to be similar but the marks PacLINC and LINPAC found not to be confusingly similar. Opposition under 3(1), 3(6), 5(3) and 5(4) also failed.

Full decision O/342/99 55Kb