istock-458990823nikada
7 September 2018Trademarks

Apple’s ‘Banana’ TM oppositions lapse

Apple has seemingly dropped its oppositions against two trademark applications by an online computer retailer, according to European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) decisions.

The office issued its rulings on Wednesday, September 5, saying it had not received required written statements from Apple.

In 2016, Spain-based Banana Computers applied for two figurative marks at the EUIPO. Both marks showed a peeled banana, with one of the marks reading ‘Banana Computer’ and the other saying ‘Banana Mobile’.

Banana Computers sought to register the marks in classes 35 and 37. Class 35 covers the covers the sale of
goods via networks of televisions and computers among others, while class 37 covers the installation, repair and maintenance of televisions, mobile devices and computers.

Apple opposed the marks in January 2017. The company cited articles 8(1)(b), 8(4) and 8(5) of the EU trademark regulation, under which trademarks may not be registered if there is a likelihood of confusion or if they “encroach” on any earlier marks.

Apple based its appeal on three of its earlier figurative marks, including its well-known logo (EU trademark number 9,784,299), an image of an apple (9,805,631), and an image of an apple cut in half (9,805,763). The earlier marks are registered under several classes, including 35 and 37.

On January 29, 2018, the Opposition Division of the EUIPO rejected the opposition and ordered Apple to pay the costs. Apple appealed against the Opposition Division’s decision in March 2018, requesting that the ruling be set aside entirely.

The EUIPO’s Fifth Board of Appeal sent a notification to Apple in July 2018 informing the company that it should have submitted a written statement outlining its grounds of appeal within four months of the Opposition Division’s decision. In this instance, Apple should have submitted a written statement on or before June 4, 2018 .

“Since no such written statement had been received by the office within the said time-limit, the appeal was likely to be dismissed as inadmissible,” said the board.

Apple was then invited to file comments and submit evidence within one month, but the board said that it did not receive a reply.

Apple’s appeal was subsequently rejected by the board as inadmissible.

Did you enjoy reading this story?  Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.

Today's top stories

CJEU clarifies distinctive trademark use requirements

UKIPO puts a lid on tea trademark dispute

USPTO to introduce ‘safer’ login

Wright, Johnston & Mackenzie promotes IP tech lawyer to partner

Already registered?

Login to your account

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk


More on this story

Patents
1 December 2011   Smartphone makers Samsung and Apple are locked in an escalating patent war that has already resulted in sales injunctions and looks set to become even more bitter.
Copyright
25 March 2014   A man in the US has demanded an eye-watering $5.2 billion from Apple, Amazon and CD Baby, an online distributor of music, for alleged copyright infringement.