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

Cookies Settings

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

Boehringer Ingelheim has instructed a team from Kirkland, while Teva is being represented by Pinsent Masons
The Delhi High Court’s latest directions offer an opportunity to move beyond remedies against bad-faith registrations and address how suspicious applications are identified in the first place, says Fatima Baig at Lexlinc
Camilla Hamrin describes how the acquisition by Acapo Onsagers will impact Bergenstråhle’s trademark practice – and reflects on changes she has seen over 30 years in IP
On a recent trip to the French capital, we learned that the UPC is squeezing domestic litigation while firms are chasing senior talent, experimenting with AI and considering new ways of organising their practices
Daniel Law says a string of lateral hires and broader expansion plans will strengthen its position to capitalise on Brazil’s burgeoning IP and patent litigation market
Jason Raeburn’s arrival will expand the firm’s London footprint in AI, copyright and tech disputes
The firm is shaping its AI strategy around partnerships with Harvey and Legora alongside internally developed tools from its legal technology company, Eltemate
A dispute Down Under shows why trademark lawyers cannot afford to wait on the sidelines when a rival brand gathers momentum
The Third Circuit’s decision in Thomson Reuters v ROSS marks the first appellate-level decision addressing AI and fair use, prompting copyright counsel to consider arguments around potential licensing markets
Injunctions for HandsFree Labs and Align Technology come as the Court of Appeal warns that busy teams must have the staffing and resources to meet UPC deadlines
Gift this article