The Peruvian judiciary provided a pleasant surprise recently, with its view of an appeal against a Peruvian Patent and Trademark Office (INDECOPI) resolution rejecting a trademark opposition case.
The case involved an opposition filed by one of our clients, who has a trademark registered in Peru under class 30, against a nearly identical Peruvian trademark application in class 32.
There is a relationship between the goods in classes 30 and 32, since products such as biscuits, bread, cookies and candies, covered by class 30, are sold in the same places as some of the goods protected by class 32 (cakes, for example). They are also consumed in similar situations, such as children’s parties.
The reason for the surprise is that, in most cases, the judiciary confirms INDECOPI’s second instance decisions, perhaps because of their ignorance of the relevant administrative rules—in this case, decision 486 of the Andean Community.
The rest of this article is locked for subscribers only. Please login to continue reading.
If you don't have a login, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content. Please use this link and follow the steps.
To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, use the same link but select the 'trial' option in the dropdown box. NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription to us that we can add you to for FREE, please email Atif Choudhury at email@example.com
INDECOPI, food, trademark application