「Successful Cases in Japan」の記事一覧

JPO Appeal Case Study: “PARFUM FRESH MIMOSA” – Descriptiveness Refusal Overturned

JPO Appeal Case Study: “PARFUM FRESH MIMOSA” – Descriptiveness Refusal Overturned
JPO Appeal Case Study: “ZONE” – Similar Marks but Dissimilar Goods

JPO Appeal Case Study: “ZONE” – Similar Marks but Dissimilar Goods
JPO Appeal Case Study: “VENN” vs. “BEN” – Similarity Refusal Overturned

JPO Appeal Case Study: “VENN” vs. “BEN” – Similarity Refusal Overturned
JPO Appeal Case Study: “e-CONNECT” vs. “CONNECT” – Similarity Refusal Overturned

JPO Appeal Case Study: “e-CONNECT” vs. “CONNECT” – Similarity Refusal Overturned
JPO Appeal Case Study: “FINE BLACK” – Descriptiveness Refusal Overturned

JPO Appeal Case Study: “FINE BLACK” – Descriptiveness Refusal Overturned
JPO Appeal Case Study: “Klaus” vs. “CLAUS” – Similarity Refusal Overturned

JPO Appeal Case Study: “Klaus” vs. “CLAUS” – Similarity Refusal Overturned
JPO Appeal Case Study: “MONO+” vs. “MONO” – Similarity Refusal Overturned

JPO Appeal Case Study: “MONO+” vs. “MONO” – Similarity Refusal Overturned
JPO Appeal Case Study: “Frush” vs. “FLASH” – Similarity Refusal Overturned

JPO Appeal Case Study: “Frush” vs. “FLASH” – Similarity Refusal Overturned
JPO Appeal Case Study: “COOL WINE” – Descriptiveness Refusal Overturned

JPO Appeal Case Study: “COOL WINE” – Descriptiveness Refusal Overturned
JPO Appeal Case Study: “PAL” vs. Composite “Pal” Device Mark– Similarity Refusal Overturned

JPO Appeal Case Study: “PAL” vs. Composite “Pal” Device Mark– Similarity Refusal Overturned