Russia: “Dribbler” and “Dribbling” are confusingly similar

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Russia: “Dribbler” and “Dribbling” are confusingly similar

Sponsored by

gorodissky-400px.png
Moving soccer ball around splash drops on the stadium field.

A trademark application for Class 41 was filed under No 2018735958 with a priority date of August 20 2018.

russia-ib-april-1.png

Examination was conducted and the registration was refused. The examiner stated that the claimed designation is confusingly similar to the trademark under registration No 610062 in Class 41.

russia-ib-april-2.jpg

The cited trademark is registered in the name of another person and has an earlier priority. The applicant appealed the decision of the patent office at the Chamber of Patent Disputes. The Chamber of Patent Disputes noted that the claimed designation is a combined designation, with “Dribbler” being the dominant element. It focuses the attention on the upper part of the designation. Overall perception of the designation begins with this element. It is easier to memorise in comparison with the non-protected combination of figures which are in fact a background and an illustration for the word which carries the basic individualising weight.

The cited trademark according to registration No 610062 with priority of February 4 2016 is a combined designation with the dominating word element “Dribbling.” It is easier to memorise than the elements in the form of a stylised picture of the Latin letter “D” and a ball represented as a circle. The letter “D” is the initial letter of the word. Both play a secondary role and serve as a decorative embellishment and illustration for the word carrying the main individualising load.

Comparative analysis of the claimed and cited designations shows that they are similar because both have a basic individualising element, the words “Dribbler” and “Dribbling” dominating the designations.

The appellant argued that the word “Dribbling” has different meanings. The Chamber of Patent Disputes agreed with that but noted that those other meanings exist in very narrow fields, such as chemistry, the automotive industry, construction materials or may be attributed to less decent vocabulary. In any case, none of that is applicable to Class 41.

The above semantic meaning of this word (manoeuvring a ball by one player) relates to common parlance, i.e. is in general use. There are some differences in the designations. However, those differences, such as colour, the font, the number of letters, the outer appearance, compositional placement of other elements, play a subordinate role in the perception of those designations.

The circumstances explained above by the Chamber of Patent Disputes lead to the conclusion that the claimed designations may be associated with each other despite their differences hence they are confusingly similar.



more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

A former Freshfields counsel and an ex-IBM counsel, who have joined forces at law firm Caldwell, say clients are increasingly sophisticated in their IP demands
Daniel Raymond, who will serve as head of client relations, tells Managing IP that law firms must offer ‘brave’ opinions if they want to keep winning new business
The new outfit, Ashurst Perkins Coie, will bring together around 3,000 lawyers across 23 countries
In the seventh episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Out, a network for LGBTQAI+ professionals and their allies
Sara Horton, co-chair of Willkie’s IP litigation group, reflects on launching the firm’s Chicago office during a global pandemic, and how she advises young, female attorneys
Brian Paul Gearing brings technical depth, litigation expertise, and experience with Japanese business culture to Pillsbury’s IP practice
News of InterDigital suing Amazon in the US and CMS IndusLaw challenging Indian rules on foreign firms were also among the top talking points
IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Gift this article