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

In-house counsel explain why firms should provide risk management advice that helps them achieve their goals
Attorneys at four firms explain the AI trends they expect in the future, including a potential shift in who plaintiffs sue for copyright infringement
The dispute at the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court pits Dryrobe against D-Robe and will include a ‘genericide’ element
Novo Nordisk losing patent rights covering Ozempic in Canada and a US Supreme Court decision favouring Ed Sheeran were also among the top talking points
The court will hand down its ruling in Iconix v Dream Pairs on Tuesday, June 24, in a case that concerns post-sale confusion
Developments included a stay in a row concerning the UPC’s jurisdiction and a timeline for the rollout of the long-awaited new CMS
Jorg Thomaier, who has been head of IP at the German pharma company since 2010, will leave later this year and hand the reins to the company’s head of patents
Companies must conduct thorough IP due diligence – even if it may not be mandatory
Celia Cheah at Wong & Partners in Malaysia says she is aiming to tap into the Baker McKenzie member firm’s international network and expand its IP portfolio
A team of partners that joined Boies Schiller Flexner say they would like to double the firm’s patent litigation capabilities
Gift this article