On October 15, 2024, the Grand Board of Appeal published its reasoned opinion on the questions referred by the Executive Director of EUIPO (Referral of February 22, 2024, already commented here) in case in case R 497/2024-G regarding EUIPO’s practice on conversion. The case deserves a quick recap. In ‘NIGHTWATCH’ (R 1241/2020-4 of 26/09/2022 (already discussed here),…
In February 2023, we reported the NIGHTWATCH decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the EUIPO addressing conversion of EUTMs, and more specifically, whether conversion can be filed where the EUTM (application) was withdrawn or surrendered after a first-instance decision refusing or invalidating it but before the appeal period has expired. The EUIPO in…
A few days ago, we reported that the Executive Director (ED) of the EUIPO had referred questions to the Grand Board of Appeal (see here) . The full referral has now been published (see here) so that stakeholders can present observations to the Grand Board under Article 37(6) EUTMDR. The referral regards the decision by…
On April 2nd, the EUIPO has publicly announced the first referral by the Executive Director to the Grand Board of Appeal pursuant to Article 159(4)(l) of the EUTMR n. 2017/1001 in conjunction with Article 37(4) and (5) of EUTMDR n. 2018/625 (see at https://www.euipo.europa.eu/es/news/first-referral-of-questions-by-the-executive-director-to-the-grand-board-of-appeal ). The main issue regards the Board of Appeal (BOA) decision…
To which extent can the General Court review decisions by the EUIPO Boards of Appeal (BoA) is an issue never properly addressed, and one that the CJEU has found to be “significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law”. Thus, with its order of July 11, 2023, it allowed an appeal…
Since the introduction on 2019 of the filtering mechanism according to which the CJEU has to decide whether or not allow an appeal to proceed in cases that have already been considered twice (such as by the EUIPO’s Board of Appeal and by the General Court), only few appeals have been considered treating issues that…
It is understandable why (most) trademarks owners do not like the five-year dependency period of an international registration since in case of “central attack” or refusal of the basic application, they face cancellation of their international registration. However, it’s less understandable why the judges of the EU General Court (GC) do not like it, unless…
A recent decision of the EUIPO’s Fourth Board of Appeal (BOA) dealing with conversion deserves a closer look at this instrument, and at the practice of the EUIPO relating to conversion (decision of September 26, 2022, Case R 1241/2020-4). To recap: when an EUTM application fails, or a registered EUTM is cancelled, it can be converted…
So you finally got your trademark registration and now you can go ahead and use it, and get back some good revenues out of your hard work. But what if you put your trademark on a product manufactured by a third party? Can you end up being held liable for damages caused by a defect…
First it was getting a registration as a trademark for the name of a State (see at https://trademarkblog.kluweriplaw.com/2022/03/28/mission-impossible-register-the-name-of-a-state-as-a-trademark/). Now, it is getting the European Union Court of Justice (CJEU) to review a decision of the General Court (GC) on trademark and design matters arising from the EUIPO Boards of Appeal. As already reported (see at…
