Device mark

Mercedes-Benz StarParts vs Star-Parts

2021年1月3日Article 4(1)(xi), Mercedes Benz, similarity of mark, StarParts, trademark appealAlphabetical word, Article 4(1)(xi), Composite mark, Device mark, Famous mark, Refusal appeal, Similarity of goods, Similarity of mark, Trademark AppealMasaki MIKAMI

In an administrative decision, the Japan Patent Office (JPO) held the “Mercedes-Benz Star Parts” with a car device mark is dissimilar to the “Star-Parts” word mark.[Appeal case no. 2020-650009, Gazette issued...

Bentley Victorious in Trademark Opposition over Winged B logo

2020年10月18日Article 4(1)(vii), Article 4(1)(xix), Article 4(1)(xv), Bentley, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, Likelihood of confusion, Trademark opposition, Winged B logoArticle 4(1)(vii), Article 4(1)(xix), Article 4(1)(xv), Composite mark, Device mark, Famous mark, Likelihood of confusion, Similarity of mark, Trademark OppositionMasaki MIKAMI

The Opposition Board of the Japan Patent Office (JPO) decided in favor of Bentley Motors Limited, the definitive British car company, in their attempt to oppose the registration of the trademark consisting of a copied...

PGA

2020年10月11日Article 4(1)(xi), Composite mark, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, Monogram, Perfect Gear Agency, PGA, Professional Golf Association, trademark appealAbbreviation, Article 4(1)(xi), Composite mark, Device mark, Monogram, Similarity of mark, Trademark AppealMasaki MIKAMI

In a recent administrative decision, the Appeal Board of Japan Patent Office (JPO) disaffirmed the examiner’s refusal and held a composite mark, consisting of words “PERFECT GEAR AGENCY” and a monogram “PGA”, is...

Japan IP High Court ruling: “I♡JAPAN” lacks distinctiveness as a trademark

2020年6月28日Article 3(1)(vi), I love Japan, inherent distinctiveness, IP High Court, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, JPO, lack of distinctiveness, trademark appeal, trademark applicationAbbreviation, Article 3(1)(vi), Composite mark, compound mark, Device mark, Inherent distinctiveness, IP High Court, Refusal appeal, Trademark AppealMasaki MIKAMI

On June 17, 2020, the Japan IP High Court affirmed the JPO’s rejection of the “I♡JAPAN” mark in relation to various goods of class 14,16,18 and 24 due to a lack of distinctiveness. [Judicial case no. Reiwa...

BRIDGESTONE Victorious in Trademark Dispute for B Mark Logo

2020年4月12日Article 4(1)(xv), Bridgestone, Famous mark, invalidation trial, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, Likelihood of confusion, tiresArticle 4(1)(xv), Article 46, Composite mark, Device mark, Famous mark, Invalidation trial, Likelihood of confusion, Similarity of goods, Similarity of markMasaki MIKAMI

The Japan Patent Office (JPO) upheld an invalidation petition by the world’s largest tire and rubber company, Bridgestone Corporation against TM Reg. no. 5664068 for the “SB NAGAMOCHI” mark due to a likelihood of...

No Success for Monster Energy Claws

2020年4月4日Article 4(1)(xv), JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, Likelihood of confusion, MONSTER ENERGY, Monster Energy Claws, Trademark oppositionArticle 4(1)(xv), Device mark, Likelihood of confusion, Similarity of goods, Similarity of mark, Trademark OppositionMasaki MIKAMI

The Japan Patent Office (JPO) dismissed a trademark opposition claimed by MONSTER ENERGY COMPANY against trademark registration no. 6091273 for “M” logo design on goods/services in class 3,5,35 and negated the...

Adidas defeated in 3-stripe trademark dispute

2020年3月20日Adidas, Article 4(1)(vii), Article 4(1)(xv), Famous mark, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, Likelihood of confusion, resistance, Three stripes, Trademark opposition, Ultra music festivalArticle 4(1)(vii), Article 4(1)(xv), Device mark, Famous mark, Likelihood of confusion, Similarity of mark, Trademark Opposition, Violation of public orderMasaki MIKAMI

The Japan Patent Office (JPO) held in an opposition filed by Adidas AG that trademark registration no. 6085087 for horizontal three-stripes (Opposed mark) shall remain as valid as ever and entirely dismissed Adidas’...

KUMAMON triumphs over bear mascot trademark battle

2020年3月7日Article 4(1)(vi), Article 4(1)(vii), Article 4(1)(xi), Article 4(1)(xix), Article 4(1)(xv), Famous mark, invalidation trial, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, Kumamon, Likelihood of confusion, macsotArticle 4(1)(vi), Article 4(1)(vii), Article 4(1)(xi), Article 4(1)(xix), Article 4(1)(xv), Device mark, Famous mark, Invalidation trial, Likelihood of confusionMasaki MIKAMI

The Japan Patent Office (JPO) sided with Kumamon and declared invalidation of trademark registration no. 5997141 for a bear-like design mark due to a likelihood of confusion with Kumamon. [Invalidation case no....

JAGUAR LAND ROVER Lost Trademark Opposition over Jaguar Logo

2019年12月8日Article 4(1)(xi), Jagtec, Jaguar, Jaguar Land Rover, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, Likelihood of confusion, Trademark oppositionArticle 4(1)(xi), Article 4(1)(xv), Composite mark, Device mark, Famous mark, Likelihood of confusion, Similarity of goods, Similarity of mark, Trademark OppositionMasaki MIKAMI

The Opposition Board of the Japan Patent Office (JPO) held a junior trademark registration no. 6104905 for a composite mark comprised of “JAGTEC” and feline device is neither similar to, nor likely to cause confusion...

Trademark Dispute Over Cigarette Sub-Brand “SIGNATURE”

2019年9月22日Article 4(1)(xi), Cigarette brand, Gudang Garam, IP High Court, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, No.555, SIGNATURE, STATE EXPRESSArticle 4(1)(xi), Composite mark, Device mark, IP High Court, Refusal appeal, Similarity of mark, Trademark AppealMasaki MIKAMI

In a decision dated September 12, 2019, the Japan IP High Court affirmed the Japan Patent Office's (JPO) determination to refuse registration for the STATE EXPRESS 555 "SIGNATURE" cigarette package design due to a...

MARKS IP LAW FIRM

Subscribe and Follow