In the year 1912, cream-filled sandwich cookies were introduced in the worldwide market by National Biscuit Corporation (NBC) under the brand name OREO. The company is the owner of the OREO brand of biscuits. Oreo was la

In the year 1912, cream-filled sandwich cookies were introduced in the worldwide market by National Biscuit Corporation (NBC) under the brand name OREO. The company is the owner of the OREO brand of biscuits. Oreo was launched in India in 2011 taking its pace into the biscuit category in India. In 2020, OREO came to know that chocolate-vanilla cream biscuits are being sold by Parle in the name of FABIO or FAB! O. NBC filed the suit for trademark infringement seeking injunction against Parle Products Private Limited from using its FAB! or FABIO marks which is similar to the plaintiffs OREO mark and from manufacturing and selling its vanilla cream filled chocolate sandwich biscuits. CONTENTIONS BY THE PLAINTIFF (OREO): That the defendant Parle Products Pvt. Ltd., has introduced its own range of chocolate-vanilla biscuits under the brand FABIO in or after January 2020. The plaintiff alleges that, prior to 2020, the defendant was using the brands FAB and FAB! for its biscuits. After 2020, the defendant introduced vanilla cream filled chocolate sandwich biscuits under the mark—FAB! O or FABIO. That the FAB! O mark is being used only for cream filled chocolate sandwich biscuits which were identical to the biscuits manufactured and sold by the plaintiff under the OREO trademark. The plaintiff alleges that the mark on the defendant's biscuit, though written as FAB! O is bound to be pronounced FABIO. Therefore, according to the plaintiff, the defendant's mark is deceptively similar to that of plaintiffs mark. That the design of the defendant's cookied copies all the essential features of the design of the plaintiff's cookie, in which the plaintiff holds trademark registrations. The Plaintiff contended that the defendant's FABIO range of vanilla cream filled chocolate sandwich biscuits was sold in a package, the trade dress of which was nearly identical or, at the very least, deceptively similar, to the trade dress of the plaintiff's OREO biscuit packages. CONTENTIONS BY THE DEFENDANT (PARLE): That there is no phonetic similarity between—OREO and—FAB! O. The only common letter, between these two words, he points out is—O. Submits that, where the first syllable of the two marks is different, it cannot be said that they are phonetically similar. Also, the defendant submits that the mark FAB! O, as used by the defendant on its biscuit packs is structurally, visually and phonetically dissimilar to the OREO mark of the plaintiff. That the aspects emphasized by the plaintiff as being common to the packaging in which the plaintiff sells its OREO biscuits and the defendant sells its F—AB!O biscuits are all common to the trade. In fact, the defendant submits that the plaintiff is claiming exclusivity on the basis of the overall appearance of its packing which, again, is common to the trade. Based on the above facts answer the following: Based on the above facts will OREO succeed in getting injunction ? Elaborate your answer with the help of decided cases.