The following excerpt is from bebe stores, inc v H & M Hennes & Mauritz AB, 2009 CanLII 90871 (CA TMOB):
There is no evidence to support any of the first three grounds of opposition which are therefore rejected. The determinative issue with respect to the remaining grounds is whether the applied for mark B.B Design is confusing with the opponent’s mark “bebe.” The material dates to assess the issue of confusion are (i) the date of decision, with respect to the ground of opposition alleging non-registrability, (ii) the date of filing of the application, in this case November 9, 2000, with respect to the second ground of opposition alleging non-entitlement, and (iii) the date of opposition, in this case September 14, 2004, in respect of the issue of non-distinctiveness: for a review of case law concerning material dates in opposition proceedings see American Retired Persons v. Canadian Retired Persons (1998), 1998 CanLII 8908 (FC), 84 C.P.R.(3d) 198 at 206 ‑ 209 (F.C.T.D.).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.