Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 24 March 2011 – Muñoz Arraiza v OHIM

(Case C-388/10 P)

Appeal – Community trade mark – Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Articles 8(1)(b), 43(2) and 44(1) – Application for Community word mark RIOJAVINA – Opposition by the proprietor of the earlier Community collective figurative mark RIOJA – Refusal to register – Likelihood of confusion

1.                     Appeals – Grounds – Mistaken assessment of the facts – Inadmissibility – Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence – Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 225 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58(1)) (see paras 31-32)

2.                     Appeals – Grounds – Mere repetition of the pleas and arguments put forward before the Court of First Instance – Error of law relied on not identified – Inadmissibility (Art. 225 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 51(1); Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 112(1)(c)) (see para. 74)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 9 June 2010 in Case T‑138/09

Muñoz Arraiza

v

OHIM

–

Consejo Regulador de la Denominación de Origen Calificada Rioja (RIOJAVINA)

, by which that court dismissed the action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 January 2009 (Case R 721/2008-2) relating to opposition proceedings between the Consejo Regulador de la Denominación de Origen Calificada Rioja and Mr Félix Muñoz Arraiza.

Operative part

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

2.

Mr Muñoz Arraiza is ordered to pay the costs.