ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> IPKat

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Intellectual Property Law

: IPKat

Deadlines for filing UK trade mark oppositions: a concerned Cat writes

By Johanna Gibson, David Pearce, Jeremy Phillips and Ilanah Simon.

ADVERTISEMENTS
Among the various concerned emails that fill the Kat's bag to bursting point is one from Cat Slater (Serjeants), who writes:
"Can I be the only one that is mystified and annoyed at the new Practice Notice (http://www.ipo.gov.uk/t-tpn-42010) issued by the UK's Intellectual Property Office (IPO)?

The IPO has decided that, with immediate effect and contrary to decades of practice, it is now interpreting the trade mark opposition period such that it includes the day of publication [of the application] and therefore excludes the day two months later. In other words, oppositions must now be filed the day before the same numbered day of the second month.

This is out of step with the OHIM opposition period and all other UK and European patent and trade mark deadlines that I am aware of. Surely, if they think there is a problem, they should change the wording of the rule?"
Says the IPKat, other people have written in with much the same comment.  None of them is called Cat -- but they too are deserving of an answer.  He knows many people who work at the IPO and, with very few possible exceptions, they give the impression of being serious, responsible souls who keep the interests of their users in mind.  One of them, for sure, will want to email the IPKat here and explain why this long-established practice has been changed.  If the reason is good enough, he's sure that OHIM and everyone else too will want to fall in line with the new UK practice.  Merpel adds, from the fact that this seems to have caught practitioners by surprise, is it possible that there hasn't been quite as much consultation as one would ideally wish?

See also Birgit Clark's post on the MARQUES Class 46 European trade mark blog here.

Full post as published by IPKat on October 08, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0021 secs (from cache 11/03/26 23:40:19)