The Board provided no support for the notion that a registrant has priority as to a specific service it was second to offer just because it was first to offer a different service that is a species of a genus that covers both specific services. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s priority determination, which formed…

We surely cannot. With Messi (see cases C-449/18P and C-474/18P MESSI)  and Miley Cyrus (case T‑368/20 MILEY CYRUS), we learnt that reputation or renown of (personal) names is a factor which should be taken in consideration when comparing marks and which may ultimately exclude confusion with an earlier similar mark. However, two recent cases seem…

The Board was found to have applied the wrong standard for the second time in adjudicating the same claim. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board applied the wrong standard in determining that an Italian metal-working company by the name of Galperti did not commit fraud in its application to trademark its name, the U.S. Court…

As you may recall from our post on the ‘Sony Vita’ invalidation case, where a trade mark is registered for a product but only used for something viewed by consumers as a different product, the trade mark right for the registered product for which it is not used is lost, even if it resembles the…

Previously on the Kluwer Trademark Blog We have amply reported about the Gömböc case before. If you have missed the previous episodes, you may read our post on the request for a preliminary ruling to the CJEU by the Kúria, the Supreme Court of Hungary, and our contribution about the preliminary ruling of the CJEU…

CA 8668/19 CHANEL v. SCENTWISH LTD— Supreme Court decision dated October 31, 2021 The Israeli Supreme Court has recently remanded to the District Court for further review a claim for a declaratory order filed by ScentWish Ltd. against Chanel S.A. ScentWish is an Israeli company which repacks regular sized parallel imports of well-known perfumes (including…

On 14 July 2021 the General Court (The Court) issued a decision in a matter between Cole Haan LLC (Cole Haan) and the Danish clothing company Samsøe and Samsøe Holding A/S (Samsøe and Samsøe) in the case T-399/20. The Court found the trademark applied for by Cole Haan consisting of the letter ‘Ø’ from the…

The Board erred by failing to consider whether the registered BROOKLYN BREW SHOP mark has acquired distinctiveness for beer-making kits. In an effort by the owners of the mark BROOKLYN BREWERY to cancel registration of the mark BROOKLYN BREW SHOP, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that the Trademark Trial…

Paragraph 30(2)(a) of the Trademarks Act requires that an application for a trademark must describe the associated goods and services in “ordinary commercial terms.” Approximately 64% of all objections raised by CIPO trademark examiners relate to goods and services descriptions. This note explains how applicants can mitigate the risk and cost of encountering such an objection. Using…