10
June
2022
NUXE vs HANUXE: are the trademarks confusingly similar?
In a decision rendered on May 25, 2022, EUIPO’s Opposition Division reaffirmed the relevance, for the purposes of establishing similarity between the signs, of the fact that the…
20
May
2022
Morellino di Scansano vs Morellone
The First Board of Appeal of EUIPO was recently called to rule on whether PDOs and PGIs consisting of a compound name should receive a protection that is not limited to the name…
6
May
2022
Barbie vs Barrbee
The well-known toy house Mattel owner, among others, of the trademark Barbie, filed an opposition against all the products of the European Union trademark application n. 18333277…
14
April
2022
1
April
2022
The patronymic trademark in the wine sector
With the sentence no. 25/22 The Board of Appeal of IPTO ruled on appeal no. 7770 denying the coexistence of two patronymic trademarks, even though they differed from each other…
17
March
2022
Shakira vs Shakera
The EUIPO’s Opposition Division rejected the application for the registration of the figurative mark SHAKERA filed in relation to the following products: candles in class 4,…
9
March
2022
Puma vs Vitalis Ener Drink Evolution
Puma has successfully opposed the EUTM application concerning a feline device and the word element “VITALIS ENER DRINK EVOLUTION” filed in order to protect in class 32 “Energy…
2
March
2022
Volkswagen vs European Flipper / Pinball Factory GmbH
The Second Board of Appeal of the EUIPO has recently issued a decision in the case Volkswagen vs. European Flipper / Pinball Factory GmbH.
Categories
Popular articles
