232.11
MSCHGLPM
CH
CH
Art. 30 Legge federale del 28 agosto 1992 sulla protezione dei marchi e delle indicazioni di provenienza (LPM) - Decisione e registrazione
LPM; Titolo primo: Marchi; Capitolo 3: Registrazione dei marchi
Art. 30 LPM · Decisione e registrazione
L’IPI dichiara la domanda irricevibile se le condizioni del deposito previste dall’articolo 28 capoverso 2 non sono soddisfatte.
Respinge la domanda di registrazione se: a. il deposito non soddisfa le condizioni formali fissate dalla presente legge o dall’ordinanza; b. le tasse prescritte non sono state pagate; c. vi sono motivi assoluti d’esclusione; d. il marchio di garanzia o il marchio collettivo non soddisfanno le esigenze previste dagli articoli 21 a 23; e. il marchio geografico non soddisfa le esigenze di cui agli articoli 27 a–27 c.
Se non vi è motivo di rigetto, registra il marchio.
Decisioni giudiziarie che applicano questa disposizione (31)
VPB 7786-2006-2610 (art. 30, al. 2, let. c LPM)
EURODATALAND Registration Refused on Absolute Grounds
Confirms absolute grounds for refusal of protection for specific products.
VPB 140-2004-2823 (Art. 30 LPM)
TEFLI v. TEFLON Opposition
Basis for exclusion from opposition proceedings.
B-1394/2016 (Art. 30 al. 2 let. c LPM)
"LOCKIT" Trademark Partially Allowed for Cardholders in Switzerland
Cited in the initial refusal by the lower authority, relating to absolute grounds for refusal.
B-1061/2017 (Art. 1 und 2 lit. a und d, Art. 30 Abs. 2 lit. c MSchG und Art. 10 der Markenschutzverordnung vom 23. Dezember 1992 (MSchV, SR 232.111))
Nutcracker 3D Trademark Registration Dispute
These articles and the ordinance were cited by the lower instance in their initial refusal, relating to grounds for refusal including lack of distinctiveness and insufficient reproduction.
B-2557/2017 (Art. 2 lit. a i.V.m. Art. 30 Abs. 2 lit. c des Markenschutzgesetzes vom 28. August 1992 (MSchG, SR 232.11))
EPRIMO Trademark Refused for Laudatory Nature
This provision, concerning the exclusion of trademarks belonging to the public domain, was used to refuse trademark protection for the service marks.
B-3660/2016 (Art. 30 Abs. 2 Bst. c MSchG)
"Sibirica" Trademark Rejected for Deception of Geographic Origin
This provision reinforces the absolute exclusion of misleading signs from trademark registration, directly supporting the court's decision to reject the trademark.
B-1408/2015 (Art. 30 Abs. 2 lit. a MSchG)
INFORMA Trademark Appeal: Partial Uphold for Distinctiveness
Used to reject the trademark application due to a formal defect in the goods and services list.
B-7230/2015 (art. 30 al. 2 let. c LPM)
COSMOPARIS trademark refused due to geographical deception
Cited by the lower authority as a basis for provisional refusal.
B-2781/2014 (Art. 1 Abs. 1 Ziff. 1 WSchG i.V.m. Art. 2 Bst. d MSchG i.V.m. Art. 30 Abs. 2 Bst. c MSchG)
CONCEPT + Trademark Application Refused for Likelihood of Confusion and Deceptive Indication
Cited for the absolute exclusion of state emblems or their components from trademark registration, including the Swiss cross.
B-3304/2012 (art. 30 al. 2 let. c LPM)
Figurative Trademark Registration Refused Due to Likeness to Red Crescent Emblem
This provision was used to exclude the sign from protection as a trademark because it violated the law on the Red Cross.
B-3381/2010 (Art. 30 al. 2 let. c LPM)
VICTORIA CUP Trademark Registration Allowed
Cited as the basis for the absolute grounds of exclusion from trademark protection.
B-4818/2010 (Art. 30 Abs. 2 Bst. a MSchG)
Roasted Almond Scent Trademark Application Rejection
Cited as the legal basis for rejecting the trademark application due to formal requirements not being met.
B-7671/2010 (Art. 30 Abs. 2 Bst. c MSchG)
AMALVI Trademark Protection Granted in Switzerland
Cited in conjunction with Art. 2 Bst. a and c MSchG to exclude signs from protection that belong to the public domain or are misleading.
B-438/2010 (art. 30 al. 2 let. c LPM)
BUDDHA-BAR Trademark Application Rejected for Public Morality Concerns
The mark is excluded from protection because it is contrary to good morals.
B-6222/2009 (Art. 2 Bst. c und Art. 30 Abs. 2 Bst. c MSchG)
LOUIS BOSTON Trademark Case
These articles state that misleading signs are excluded from trademark protection and registration, forming the legal basis for the court's decision on whether the mark LOUIS BOSTON is misleading.