Search results for

In a recent ruling by the Court of The Hague C/09/545302 / KG ZA 17-1636, Pfizer and Ono faced each other over an alleged abuse of German process law by Pfizer.

On March 8 2018, the European Court of Justice decided on the preliminary questions posed by the Oberlandesgericht in Düsseldorf regarding the appearance of a design determined by technical function ((C-395/16) DOCERAM v CeramTec).

Generally trade mark use does not raise questions. The law (Article 1484) simply states that the trade mark may be used on goods, in documents, in advertisements and other material. When the issue of non-use is examined by courts, these provisions of the law are compared with what happens on the market. For the purpose of proper use, the law (Article 1486) also states that a trade mark may be used by the trade mark owner himself as well as by other people under the control of the trade mark owner. Control should be understood broadly. This is not only a licence but any transaction or chain of transactions where the trade mark owner is aware of the use by other people and may intervene if necessary. This is a relationship pattern that has been adjusted by judicial practice and proved in many cases.

Does a trade mark owner have to be physically present in the Philippines to show genuine use of a mark? In the case of W Land Holdings Inc v Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide Inc (G.R. No. 222366, December 4 2017), the Supreme Court (SC) ruled in favour of Starwood, asserting that it makes actual use of its W mark in the Philippines. This case arose from a cancellation action filed with the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL).

Louis Vuitton Malletier, the owner of the LV registered trade mark, recently filed a civil lawsuit with the IP Court against a second-hand luxury goods vendor, accusing the vendor of selling LV branded counterfeits online. In November 2017, the IP Court issued a judgment. The defendant was found guilty of trade mark infringement while Louis Vuitton was awarded compensatory damages.

Unlike many countries, Turkish trade mark law has had a rule since 1995 that a senior trade mark registration or application identical or indistinguishably similar to a junior trade mark application can be raised as an absolute ground for refusal if the goods/services are also identical or of the same type. The Turkish Industrial Property Code (the IP Code), which entered into force on January 10 2017, softened this rule, and in cases where an applicant submits a notarised document to the Trademark Office indicating that the owner of the prior registration agrees to the registration of the trade mark application that is identical or indistinguishably similar to a senior trade mark or trade mark application, then the junior application cannot be rejected on this ground.

The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) announced a fee revision for patents and trade marks with effect from April 1 2017. Regarding patents, the application fees for searches or supplementary search reports, local search and examination reports, and international search and examination reports, are reduced by 14%, 25% and 37%, respectively. There is also a 30% fee reduction in the application to register trade marks that utilise the IPOS pre-approved list of goods and services. Thus, businesses and entrepreneurs will see a substantial fee reduction for patent and trade mark applications.

In the Vietnamese judicial system, there are two avenues for reviewing a court's final judgment. Under the current procedural legislation, if such judgment can be shown to be based on a serious error of law, it can go through the process of cassation, where the judgment will be reviewed and possibly annulled due to the material error in the procedure. If, on the other hand, new evidence or facts are discovered that could have affected the outcome of the case, the case can be retried.

The USPTO unveiled the long-awaited redesigned patent cover at the South by Southwest festival in Austin in March. It will replace the patent cover that has been in service for more than 30 years when the 10 millionth patent is granted, which is expected to happen this summer.

In the case In re El Galan, Inc, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) held that there was a likelihood of confusion between marks covering cigars and tequila, finding that such products are related and complementary. Although this case is not precedential, it provides guidance to parties attempting to ascertain whether a mark will be available for registration and exploring arguments available to assist in overcoming likelihood of confusion refusals made by a Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) examiner.