New Mexican trademark landscape as partial non-use cancellation actions considered

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

New Mexican trademark landscape as partial non-use cancellation actions considered

Sponsored by

olivares-400px.jpg
law-law-8429916.jpg

Three years after a new industrial property law took effect, the time has come for an important action to become available regarding contested trademark registrations. Emmanuel Chávez of OLIVARES heralds a ‘positive’ development

The Mexican Federal Law for the Protection of Industrial Property (the New IP Law) entered into force on November 5 2020, in response to the entering into force of the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement.

The New IP Law introduced partial non-use cancellation actions, which may only be initiated against registrations that were applied for, and granted, under the New IP Law.

To initiate these actions, it is necessary that a term of three years has passed since the date of registration. Thus, as it has been three years since the entering into force of the New IP Law, the first partial non-use cancellation actions are to be initiated and decided soon.

Commentary on Mexico’s new system on trademark use

These new actions will have a positive impact on the legal system in Mexico, eliminating trademarks covering the ‘heading class’, or general headings, but allowing new trademarks for organisations in specific sectors that are interested in using their trademark effectively, which will provide incentives for further creativity.

It will be interesting to see how the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (IMPI) will analyse the evidence to determine if a trademark has been used for a product or service.

It will take some time to establish a criterion for these kinds of actions, since there will be decisions from IMPI, the Federal Court for Administrative Affairs, Federal Circuit Courts, and even the Supreme Court of Justice.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The Australian side, in particular, can benefit by capitalising on its independent status to bring in more work from Western countries while still working with its former Chinese partner
Koen Bijvank of Brinkhof and Johannes Heselberger of Bardehle Pagenberg discuss the Amgen v Sanofi case and why it will be cited frequently
View the official winners of the 2025 Social Impact EMEA Awards
King & Wood Mallesons will break into two entities, 14 years after a merger between a Chinese and an Australian firm created the combined outfit
Teams from Shakespeare Martineau and DWF will take centre stage in a dispute concerning the registrability of dairy terminology in plant-based products
Senem Kayahan, attorney and founder at PatentSe, discusses how she divides prosecution tasks, and reveals the importance of empathetic client advice
The association’s Australian group has filed a formal complaint against the choice of venue, citing Dubai as an unsafe environment for the LGBTQIA+ community
Firm says appointment of Nick McDonald will boost its expertise in cross-border disputes, including at the Unified Patent Court
In the final episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss the IP Inclusive Charter and the senior leaders’ pledge
Law firms are integrating AI to remain competitive, and some are noticing an impact on traditional training and billing models
Gift this article