During the second half of 2018 and the first half of 2019, specialised prosecutors in Paraguay have increased the amount of charges for offences against IP rights, which sends a clear message that such violations have legal consequences.
In In re Siny Corp, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has upheld a decision denying registration of the mark CASALANA and finding that the website printout submitted by the applicant as a specimen of use was only advertising.
The new Ukrainian language law, which enters into force on 16 July 2019, will require the use of the Ukrainian language for product labelling and advertising, with the exception of trademarks.
In Biolatte Oy v EUIPO, the EU General Court has upheld a decision of the EUIPO finding that the mark BIOLATTE was devoid of distinctive character for dietary supplements in Class 5.
The China National Intellectual Property Administration has recently recognised a decision involving the invalidation of a registered trademark based on forged application documents as a model case for 2018.
In a recent decision under the UDRP, a panel has denied the transfer of the domain name ‘tambour.com’ because the complainant had failed to demonstrate that the respondent was targeting its trademark TAMBOUR, a descriptive word in some languages.
In Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd v Ajanta Pharma Ltd, the Delhi High Court has held that the strict similarity test for pharmaceutical brands set forth in Cadila also applies to nutraceutical brands.
The Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office has upheld the rejection of the application to register the mark NOVICHOK for alcohol, beers and non-alcoholic beverages under the rarely invoked Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation 2017/1001.
A Singapore boutique cake shop has successfully defended its registration for the mark THE PATISSIER (the French word ‘pâtissier’ means ‘pastry chef’) for a range of goods and services relating to bakery products.
The Malaysian Parliament has tabled a new Trademarks Bill 2019 which could bring about significant changes to the existing regime for trademark protection and enforcement in the country.
In Kroma Makeup EU LLC v Boldface Licensing + Branding Inc, the US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit has held that an exclusive foreign licensee lacked standing to sue for trademark infringement in the United States.
In a case involving a mark representing a cross on the side of a sports shoe, the Court of Justice of the European Union has confirmed that it was irrelevant to determine whether the mark at issue was a position or a figurative mark in order to assess its subject matter.
Uzbekistan has adopted a new law which introduces fines for the infringement of copyright and related rights, patents, utility models, industrial designs and company names, and doubles the existing fines for trademark infringement.
In proceedings involving the ‘Hao Yao Shi’ logo mark, the Chinese Trademark Review and Adjudication Board has agreed for the first time to conduct an oral hearing for an appeal in a non-use cancellation action.
In Holzer y Cia SA de CV v EUIPO, the General Court has upheld a decision of the EUIPO finding that Holzer y Cia SA de CV had applied for the registration of two ANN TAYLOR marks in bad faith.