-
Patek Philippe Opposition Fails: EUIPO Finds No Likelihood of Confusion
On 11 April 2025, the EUIPO Opposition Division rejected an opposition brought by Patek Philippe against a figurative trade mark featuring two stylised letters ‘PP’. The Swiss luxury watchmaker alleged a likelihood of confusion with its own figurative ‘PP’ shield marks. However, the Office concluded that the visual differences between the signs were sufficient to…
-
Decanting the Details: Chianti Trademark Case
On April 16, 2025, a significant ruling was issued by the Second Board of Appeal, concerning a dispute between the Consorzio Vino Chianti and the Consorzio Vino Chianti Classico. This case is notable not only for its implications within the wine industry but also for the broader context of trademark law as it pertains to…
-
Dr. Martens v. Shein: Dr. Martens returns to court in a post-settlement trademark dispute
On 2 May 2025, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California issued an order in Airwair International Ltd v. Zoetop Business Co. Ltd allowing key claims to proceed in a trademark dispute involving the Dr. Martens brand and Shein. The decision follows Airwair’s allegations that Zoetop, Shein’s parent company, breached a…
-
Louis Vuitton Secures Dismissal of Pocket Socks’ Claims in Trademark Dispute
On 29 April 2025, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California granted Louis Vuitton North America, Inc.’s motion to dismiss all claims brought by Pocket Socks, Inc. The court found that the complaint lacked sufficient factual detail to establish a realistic likelihood of consumer confusion and failed to define the claimed…
-
Scentologia vs. Scentology: UKIPO’s Analysis of Visual, Aural, and Conceptual Similarity
On 17 April 2025, the UK Intellectual Property Office issued its decision in the opposition proceedings brought by Inensa SA against GDS Prestige (FZC)’s application to register the mark Scentologia. The opposition was based on Section 5(2)(b) of the Trade Marks Act 1994, relying on Inensa SA’s earlier registered mark Scentology. This article outlines the…
-
Levi Strauss v. Gear Up International: Use of Curved Line Device Would Take Unfair Advantage of Levi’s Mark
On 29 April 2025, the EUIPO issued its decision in Levi Strauss & Co v. Gear Up International Ltd, partially upholding Levi Strauss’s opposition to a figurative trade mark application filed by Gear Up. The contested sign, consisting of two curved lines converging at a pointed centre, was found to create a mental association with…
-
COCO v. COCOSTEAM: Chanel Wins EUIPO Opposition
In a decision dated 14 April 2025, the Opposition Division of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) upheld Chanel’s opposition against the European Union trade mark application for COCOSTEAM. The decision provides a clear application of the fundamental principles governing the assessment of likelihood of confusion under Article 8(1)(b) EUTMR, particularly where an earlier…
-
Rolex v. Laulex: Reputation as a Basis for Refusal
On 7 February 2025, the EUIPO Opposition Division upheld an opposition filed by Rolex S.A. against a figurative European Union trade mark (EUTM) application for “Laulex”, rejecting the application in its entirety under Article 8(5) EUTMR. This decision confirms the strength of reputation-based protection within EU trade mark law and illustrates the threshold at which…
-
POLO v. POLO REALE: A Closer Look at the EU Trademark Opposition
On April 7, 2025, the Opposition Division of the European Union Intellectual Property Office delivered a significant ruling in a dispute between The Polo/Lauren Company L.P., the renowned American luxury brand, and Prime Cotton FZ-LCC from the UAE. The opposition concerned trademark application No 18 979 833 for the ‘POLO REALE’ figurative mark. This ruling…