We´ve added guides to European Union Trade Mark procedures to our existing jurisdictional guides on trademark Opposition, Invalidity and Revocation. Who can file such proceedings, where and when? Can proceedings be avoided through amicable settlement? We cover these issues and more taking into account changes which came into effect on 1 October 2017 as a result of the second wave of the Legislative
We are delighted to be sponsoring and speaking at the seventh annual McCarthy Institute Trademark Symposium, taking place on February 17, 2017 in Seattle, Washington. The one-day event, titled “Trademark Law and Its Challenges,” brings together corporate brand representatives, trademark attorneys and public policymakers to address new issues in trademark law. Two of our trademark
EUIPO’s Boards of Appeal have recently introduced expedited appeal proceedings to deal with urgent cases. Requests for this option can be submitted by appellants together with the statement of grounds or, for defendants, with their reply. It appears unlikely that the Boards will set expedited proceedings of their own motion. As to formalities, there’s no
Judgment of 22 June 2016 in Case C-207/15 P Nissan Jidosha KK v EUIPO The Court of Justice of the European Union(CJEU) has held that where an EU trade mark (EUTM) has been partially renewed the owner still enjoys the six month grace period in which to file any further partial renewal requests relating to
As we advised in LimeGreen IP News on Friday 24 June, the result of the UK referendum on whether the UK should remain a member of the EU may cause some uncertainty for some time from a brand protection perspective. It is important to remember that the UK is still a member of the EU.
Judgment of 10 May 2016 in Case T‑806/14 August Storck KG v EUIPO In 2013, August Storck KG filed an International Registration designating the European Union to protect the following packaging design as a trade mark: The application covered “confectionery, chocolate, chocolate products, pastries, ice-cream, preparations for making the aforementioned products” in class 30. The
The EUIPO’s Board of Appeal has held that neither a heightened degree of attentiveness in relation to pharmaceutical products, nor the fact that conflicting marks primarily coincide in elements which health professionals might understand as an allusion to an active ingredient, can rule out a likelihood of confusion. This is all the more true if
The new European Union Trade Mark Regulation (“EUTMR”) comes into force tomorrow and represents the most significant change in European trade mark law in the last 20 years. Rather than setting out all provisions in full, the text of the new EUTMR only sets out the provisions of the previous regulation that have been amended,
In an Order on 17 February 2016 (Shoe Branding Europe v adidas in Case C-396/15 P*) the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”), Europe’s highest Court, confirmed a decision of the General Court upholding adidas’ opposition against Shoe Branding’s Community trademark (“CTM”) application for two stripes positioned on a shoe. The Order confirmed
In our previous post we mentioned that the renewal fee situation for EUTMs was no longer clear, and that we considered the approach put forward by OHIM in its draft guidelines to be incorrect. We are pleased to report that the situation has now been clarified. OHIM has today published a President’s Communication confirming that:
In our previous post we mentioned that brand owners should consider deferring renewals of EUTMs until after the introduction of the new EUTM Regulation where possible to save money. Unfortunately, the renewal fee situation is no longer clear. The new Regulation will enter into force on 23 March 2016. However, OHIM has issued draft guidelines
Today, the European Commission published the new Trade Marks Directive (governing national trade marks across the EU) and the new Community Trade Mark Regulation (governing EU wide trade marks) in the EU Official Journal (L 341). These texts aim to make EU trade mark law fit for the challenges of business in the 21st Century.
Yesterday the European Parliament approved the biggest change in European trademark law in the last 20 years. Comprising a new Trade Marks Directive (governing national trade marks across the EU) and a new Community Trade Mark Regulation (governing EU wide trade marks), it aims to make EU trade mark law fit for the challenges of
… but CTM owners should consider acting now on specifications. The final compromise texts of the amended EU trade mark Directive and Regulation, the basic legislation governing trade marks in the EU, have now been published by the Council of the European Union on its website. They are not yet law, although they are unlikely
In view of a recent OHIM Board of Appeal decision, opponents relying on “re-filed marks” which are not subject to the use requirement should be aware that they may nevertheless be required to prove use. A re-filed mark is a mark filed by a proprietor who owns a prior mark for the same sign for