Mexico: Disadvantages of the Madrid Protocol

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Mexico: Disadvantages of the Madrid Protocol

The prosecution of trade mark applications under the Madrid Protocol is increasingly common among foreign clients. However, as far as it concerns to Mexico, there are some disadvantages for Madrid users:

1) Once a trade mark application is filed directly before the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (under the national system), it is assigned to an examiner, who will conduct a formal examination and then an official search report. If no official actions are received, the estimated time of achieving registration is about five months, otherwise, it could vary from 12 to 18 months.

On the other side, if the application is filed and prosecuted through WIPO, it is necessary to wait between eight and 18 months until the International Office turns the application to the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property for its examination. Thereafter, it may take from 14 to 18 months for the Mexican Trade Mark Office to examine the application and either grant registration or issue a provisional refusal.

As readers will realise, assuming that no provisional refusals are issued in the trade mark applications filed through WIPO, the applicant may obtain its registration in at least 14 months. While under the same scenario but through the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property, the applicant may obtain its registration in five months.

2) In trade mark registrations prosecuted under the Madrid system, there is not an appointed attorney of record nor an address for service in Mexico. Therefore, if a third party contests the validity of those registrations (based on nullity or cancellation actions), these communications/actions could not be served to an attorney in Mexico; thus, in the absence of a national attorney, any communication/action would have to be served by means of a notice in a newspaper which normally is hard to detect.

Regarding the certificates of registration, in trade mark applications prosecuted under the Madrid system, the original documents are kept in the files of the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property.

3) In our country, each trade mark application can only cover goods or services comprised in one class as we follow the so-called principle of specialty of trade marks and there are no multi-class applications.

Therefore, if an international registration designating Mexico is filed for multiple classes, the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property splits the International Registrations into individual national applications, one for each designated class, and each designated class will be handled under a separate national application number and faces independent examinations, paying government fees separately.

While the Madrid Protocol has certain advantages, it is advisable to analyse each case to determine which system is best for the applicant's needs.

Garcia_Mariana

Mariana García


OlivaresPedro Luis Ogazón No 17Col San Angel01000 México DFTel: +5255 53 22 30 00Fax: +5255 53 22 30 01olivlaw@olivares.com.mxwww.olivares.com.mx

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The move marks the latest step in Temu’s push to protect brands’ intellectual property by collaborating with industry groups and enforcement agencies. Managing IP learns about a rapidly scaling strategy and two success stories
A counterfeiting crackdown targeting fake FIFA World Cup merchandise and new partner hires by CMS, HGF and Winston Strawn were also among the top talking points
Law firms need to accept the hard truth: talent migration isn't personal; it's business as usual
Judge Alan Albright is to leave his role at the Western District of Texas, and could return to private practice
Stobbs has successfully seen off a contempt of court application filed against the firm and two of its lawyers
After almost a quarter of a century, Marshall Gerstein has a new managing partner
Abbott winning another round against Sinocare and Menarini, and 'long arm' clarification on the UK's position within the UPC, were also among major developments
Maria Peyman, head of IP at Birketts, explains why the firm is adopting a ‘seamless approach’ for clients by integrating two of its practice areas
Matthew Swinn, who leads the firm’s IP practice, discusses why Mallesons is well-placed to remain a major IP force
Lawyers at A&O Shearman analyse developments regarding UPC’s long-arm jurisdiction, including its scope and jurisdictional limits
Gift this article