trademark appeal

JPO rejects “AIR NECKTIE” due to similarity to NIKE “AIR”

2021年3月21日AIR, AIR NECKTIE, Appeal Board, Article 4(1)(xi), Composite mark, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, NIKE, Similarity of goods, similarity of mark, Supreme Court, trademark appealAlphabetical word, Article 4(1)(xi), Composite mark, Famous mark, Generic term, Refusal appeal, Similarity of goods, Similarity of mark, Trademark AppealMasaki MIKAMI

The Japan Patent Office (JPO) dismissed an appeal filed by a Japanese individual who sought registration for use of the wordmark “AIR NECKTIE” on neckties in class 25 due to the similarity to NIKE “AIR.”[Appeal...

“FS12” can’t be registered due to a lack of distinctiveness

2021年3月7日Article 3(1)(v), FS12, inherent distinctiveness, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, lack of distinctiveness, trademark appeal, trademark application, very simple and common markAcquired distinctiveness, Alphabetical word, Article 3(1)(v), Inherent distinctiveness, Refusal appeal, Trademark Appeal, Trademark Examination GuidelineMasaki MIKAMI

The Japan Patent Office (JPO) affirmed the examiner’s refusal and decided to reject a wordmark “FS12” due to a lack of inherent distinctiveness.[Appeal case no. 2019-650019, Gazette issued date: January 29,...

Japan IP High Court ruled “AZURE” is unregistrable due to “AZULE”

2021年1月17日Article 4(1)(xi), AZULE, AZURE, IP High Court, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, similarity of mark, similarity of service, trademark appealArticle 4(1)(xi), IP High Court, Similarity of mark, Similarity of service, Trademark AppealMasaki MIKAMI

On December 23, 2020, the Japan IP High Court affirmed a decision of the Japan Patent Office (JPO) finding that the “AZURE” mark is similar to senior trademark registration no. 5454302 for word mark “AZULE” in...

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...

El Clasico Scores a Goal in Trademark Race

2020年12月6日Article 3(1)(iii), Article 4(1)(xvi), El Clasico, FC Barcelona, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, lack of distinctiveness, LaLiga, Real Madrid, trademark appealArticle 3(1)(iii), Article 4(1)(xvi), Generic term, Inherent distinctiveness, Madrid Protocol, Refusal appealMasaki MIKAMI

The Japan Patent Office (JPO) overturned the examiner’s refusal and decided to register the “El Clasico” mark in connection with sporting activities, production of sports events, sports information services, and...

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...

POLO RALPH LAUREN vs. US POLO ASSN

2020年8月9日Article 4(1)(xi), Article 4(1)(xv), Famous mark, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, Likelihood of confusion, POLO, Ralph Lauren, similarity of mark, trademark appeal, US POLO ASSNAbbreviation, Article 4(1)(xi), Article 4(1)(xv), Composite mark, Famous mark, Likelihood of confusion, Similarity of goods, Similarity of mark, Trademark AppealMasaki MIKAMI

The Appeal Board of the Japan Patent Office (JPO) affirmed Examiner’s refusal to register the wordmark “U.S. POLO ASSN.” due to similarity to and a likelihood of confusion with earlier registered mark “POLO”...

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...

Japan IP High Court sided with Apple Inc. in “CORE ML” trademark dispute

2020年6月20日Apple Inc., Article 4(1)(xi), Composite mark, CORE MIL, IP High Court, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, Seiko, similarity of mark, Supreme Court, trademark appealAbbreviation, Article 4(1)(xi), Composite mark, compound mark, Inherent distinctiveness, IP High Court, Refusal appeal, Similarity of mark, Trademark AppealMasaki MIKAMI

On May 20, 2020, the Japan IP High Court denied the JPO decision and sided with Apple Inc. by finding the “CORE ML” mark is dissimilar to senior trademark registration no. 5611369 for word mark “CORE” in...

Sweet, but long road to register “Ghana” on chocolates

2020年6月13日Acquired distinctiveness, Article 3(1)(iii), Article 4(1)(xvi), Chocolate, Ghana, inherent distinctiveness, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, Lotte, trademark appealAcquired distinctiveness, Article 3(1)(iii), Article 3(2), Article 4(1)(xvi), Famous mark, Geographical indication, Inherent distinctiveness, Trademark Appeal, Trademark Examination GuidelineMasaki MIKAMI

The Japan Patent Office (JPO) allowed trademark registration of “Ghana” in connection with chocolates of class 30 by finding acquired distinctiveness as a source indicator of Lotte Co., Ltd., a Korea-based...

MARKS IP LAW FIRM

Subscribe and Follow