The team of IP Consulting successfully argued the lack of likelihood of confusion between the figurative sign “Fitto” and the word mark “VITEAU”. The applicant – proprietor of EUTM “VITEAU”- claimed that there was a likelihood of confusion. The reason – the goods were identical or similar and the signs were similar. He also pointed…
“ИЗБАТА” trade mark and “РЕСТОРАНТ ИЗБАТА 1932” trade mark with an identical distinctive element
The Opposition (distinctive element) is filed against the trade mark application for the registration of figurative trade mark “РЕСТОРАНТ ИЗБАТА 1932”. The opponent is represented by the team of IP Consulting. The Opposition is filed under Art. 38b, par. 1 in connection to Art. 12, par. 1, point 2 from Law on Marks and Geographical…
The Patent Office confirms the similarity between “ЦАРСКА” and “ЦАРСКА ТРАПЕЗА”
A company, represented by the team of IP Consulting filed an Opposition against all the classes of a Bulgarian trade mark application “ЦАРСКА ТРАПЕЗА”. The opposition has been filed under Article 38b, par. 1, pt. 1 in connection to Art. 12, par.1, pt. 1 from Law on Marks and Geographical Indications /LMGI/. According to Article…
The importance of word meaning in the context of a trade mark dispute
The opponent filed an opposition against some of the goods and services of European Union trade mark application for the figurative trade mark The above-mentioned contested trade mark is represented by the team of IP Consulting. The opponent invoked Article 8(1)(b) EUTMR on the basis of French trade mark registration for the figurative trade mark…
A case for the existence and validity of an earlier right within the meaning of Article 8(2) EUTMR
The opponent filed an opposition against some of the goods and services in Classes 30 and 35 of European Union trade mark application for the figurative mark The applicant is represented by the team of IP Consulting. The opposition is based on European Union trade mark application and French trade mark registration, both for the…
The aspects of copyright infringements in a trade mark dispute
On 20/06/2016 the applicant, represented by the team of IP Consulting, filed an application for a declaration of invalidity. The application is against European Union trade mark filed on 10/09/2014 and registered on 02/03/2015. It is based on European Union trade mark, filed on 15/01/2014 and registered on 22/05/2014. The document aims invalidation for all the goods…
IP Consulting proved there is no likelihood of confusion between two trade marks
The opponent filed an opposition against some of the goods of European Union trade mark application for the word mark “HYALURONICA”. The applicant is represented by the team of IP Consulting. The opposition was against all the goods in Classes 3 and 5. It was based on European Union trade mark registration for a figurative mark and the…
The team of IP Consulting with successful opposition proceeding against trade mark similarities
The opponent, represented by the team of IP Consulting, filed an opposition against some of the goods of European Union trade mark application, namely against all the goods in Class 3. The opposition is based on international trade mark registration designating Bulgaria, Poland and Romania. The relevant territory is Bulgaria and the opponent invoked Article…
The importance of words meaning and general impression
The opponent, represented by the team of IP Consulting, filed an opposition against all the goods of European Union trade mark application (figurative) The opposition is based on international trade mark registration (figurative), designating Croatia and Romania. The opponent invoked Article 8 (1) (b) EUTMR – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION. The relevant territory is Croatia. –…
The distinctiveness and the similarity in the context of a dispute about Trademarks
A foreign company, represented by the team of IP Consulting, filed an Opposition against all the goods of European trademark application, namely against all the goods in Class 5. The opposition is based on European trademark registration for a figurative mark. The opponent invoked Article 8(1)(a) and (b) EUTMR. The goods on which the Opposition is…
