Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VPB 2000.2464 AI generated

Exclusion of Defendant for Failure to Appoint Representative Leads to Trademark Refusal

Case Number VPB 2000.2464
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Switzerland · Administrative Practice of Federal Authorities (VPB) (CH)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Court Costs Borne by public authority
Open official source Entscheidsuche mirror Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The opposing party requested the exclusion of the defendant from an opposition proceeding due to their failure to appoint a representative. The court granted this request, leading to the exclusion of the defendant and the admission of the opposition against the trademark application. Consequently, the preliminary refusal of the trademark was converted into a definitive refusal, and the defendant was ordered to pay costs to the opposing party.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 1, Art. 8, Art. 22, Art. 31, Art. 33; Exclusion of Defendant for Failure to Appoint Representative Leads to Trademark Refusal: The court granted this request, leading to the exclusion of the defendant and the admission of the opposition against the trademark application. Consequently, the preliminary refusal of the trademark was converted into a definitive refusal, and the defendant was ordered to pay costs to the opposing party.

Keywords

AI generated
trademark opposition exclusion order procedural requirement opposition proceedings unauthorized representation order to pay

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 1
The ruling implicitly refers to the general framework for opposition procedures, likely codified in Article 1 of the relevant trademark law, which defines the scope of opposition proceedings.
Art. 8
This article likely pertains to the exclusion of a party from proceedings due to failure to comply with procedural requirements, such as appointing a representative, which is the basis for the first order.
Art. 22
This article likely covers the admission of opposition and the transformation of provisional refusal into a definitive refusal, as stated in points 2 and 3 of the decision.
Art. 31
This article likely concerns the retention of fees in opposition proceedings, justifying point 4 of the decision.
Art. 33
This article likely addresses the awarding of costs or compensation for expenses in opposition proceedings, forming the basis for point 5 of the decision.
AI generated
VPB 5168-2002-1768
Trademark Opposition Rejected After Defendant's Exclusion
VPB 5738-2001-2517
International Trademark Opposition Proceedings Dismissed for Failure to Appoint Representative
VPB 2506-2005-0811
Trademark Opposition Dismissed Due to Defendant's Non-Participation
VPB 5388-2000-2470
International Trademark Opposition - Defendant Excluded - Provisional Refusal Becomes Definitive
VPB 2001.647
International Trademark Application: Opposition Rejected Due to Lack of Representative

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 1

The ruling implicitly refers to the general framework for opposition procedures, likely codified in Article 1 of the relevant trademark law, which defines the scope of opposition proceedings.

Art. 8

This article likely pertains to the exclusion of a party from proceedings due to failure to comply with procedural requirements, such as appointing a representative, which is the basis for the first order.

Art. 22

This article likely covers the admission of opposition and the transformation of provisional refusal into a definitive refusal, as stated in points 2 and 3 of the decision.

Art. 31

This article likely concerns the retention of fees in opposition proceedings, justifying point 4 of the decision.

Art. 33

This article likely addresses the awarding of costs or compensation for expenses in opposition proceedings, forming the basis for point 5 of the decision.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Décision dans la procédure d’opposition n° 3629/1999

Opposant/e SARA LEE/D.E. ESPANA, S.A., 141-143, carretera Real, E-08 960 SAINT JUST DESVERN, Barcelona (Espagne), Représenté par Ammann SA, Schwarztorstrasse 31, 3001 Berne contre Défendeur/resse Karl Rieker GmbH & Co. KG, 56, Lindenstrasse, D-72411 Bodelshausen (DE) L’Institut Fédéral de la Propriété Intellectuelle a, le 16 novembre 2000, décidé :

1. La défenderesse n’ayant pas désigné de mandataire, elle est exclue de la procédure d’opposition.

2. L’opposition n° 3629 contre la marque internationale n° 710 120 «PRIN- CESS» (fig.) est admise.

3. Le refus provisoire total émis le 8 octobre 1999 à l’encontre de la marque internationale n° 710 720 sera transformé en refus définitif lorsque la présente décision sera entrée en force.

4. La taxe d’opposition de fr. 800.-- reste acquise à l’Institut.

5. Il est mis à la charge de la défenderesse le paiement à l’opposante d’une somme de fr. 2000.-- à titre de dépens (y compris fr. 800.-- à titre de remboursement de la taxe d’opposition).

6. La présente décision est notifiée aux parties, par publication dans la Feuille fédérale pour la partie défenderesse.

Voies de droit: La présente décision peut être attaquée par voie de recours dans les 30 jours à dater de sa notification devant la Commission de recours en matière de propriété intellectuelle, Einsteinstrasse 2, 3003 Berne. Les mémoires de recours doivent être présentés en trois exemplaires. Une copie de la décision attaquée est à joindre aux mémoires de recours.

16 novembre 2000 Institut Fédéral de la Propriété Intellectuelle:

Division des marques

2000-2464 5389 Schweizerisches Bundesarchiv, Digitale Amtsdruckschriften Archives fédérales suisses, Publications officielles numérisées Archivio federale svizzero, Pubblicazioni ufficiali digitali

Décision dans la procédure d'opposition n° 3629/1999

In Bundesblatt Dans Feuille fédérale In Foglio federale

Jahr 2000 Année Anno

Band 1 Volume Volume

Heft 47 Cahier Numero

Geschäftsnummer --- Numéro d'affaire Numero dell'oggetto

Datum 28.11.2000 Date Data

Seite 5389-5389 Page Pagina

Ref. No 10 124 987

Die elektronischen Daten der Schweizerischen Bundeskanzlei wurden durch das Schweizerische Bundesarchiv übernommen.

Les données électroniques de la Chancellerie fédérale suisse ont été reprises par les Archives fédérales suisses.

I dati elettronici della Cancelleria federale svizzera sono stati ripresi dall'Archivio federale svizzero.