Pharmaceutique

French Courts link level of care to doctor prescription

In the context of a counterfeiting action involving the marks TRICOR and PRICOR, the Court of First Instance of Paris has first stressed that pharmaceutical products with different therapeutic aims remained identical considering these products have the same nature, same overall purpose, same consumers and same distribution channels. This is perfectly in line with the […]

French Courts link level of care to doctor prescription Lire la suite »

Amazing enlargement of pharmaceuticals similarity

While holding the marks AZURIL and AZULIB to be similar, the decision of opposition of the OHIM dated June 7, 2010, shows the enlargement of the similarity (and even of the identity) of pharmaceuticals with the other products of class 5. The OHIM said ‘fungicides’ to be identical to ‘pharmaceutical preparations’ because fungicides comprise antimycotics

Amazing enlargement of pharmaceuticals similarity Lire la suite »

The distinctiveness of VISIOTONIC

Just published is a decision of the Court of Appeal of Paris dated March 19, 2010, which considered that the mark VISIOTONIC shown below was distinctive for products of classes 5 and 10 and in particular for ‘pharmaceutical, veterinary and hygienic products; dietetic substances for medical use; chirurgical apparatus and instruments; artificial members, eyes and

The distinctiveness of VISIOTONIC Lire la suite »

Interesting findings in yesterday’s General Court decision

In The General Court has raised three interesting aspects in its decision of yesterday (case T-487/08) which dealt with the opposition involving the CTM application for KREMEZIN and the earlier WIPO trademark KRENOSIN. The earlier mark covered ‘pharmaceutical, veterinary and sanitary product’ in class 5 and was under use obligation. When replying to the request

Interesting findings in yesterday’s General Court decision Lire la suite »

Comparison of trademarks: OPTREX and OPDREXNW & device

The OHIM has upheld that there was no risk of confusion between the CTM application for OPDREXNW (displayed below) and the earlier French word trademark for OPTREX. The CTM was said to present some significant graphic aspects which had no equivalent in the earlier mark such as the division of OPDREXNW in various segments through

Comparison of trademarks: OPTREX and OPDREXNW & device Lire la suite »

Comparison of trademarks: FEMAGRO & device vs./ FEMARA

OHIM upheld the contested CTM application for FEMAGRO (displayed below) and the earlier opposed Community word mark FEMARA to be confusingly similar. The contested application particularly covered “pharmaceutical products for female sexual dysfunction”. Use of FEMARA (submitted to use obligation) was evidenced in respect pharmaceutical against breast cancer… The OHIM considered that although “FEM-” alluded

Comparison of trademarks: FEMAGRO & device vs./ FEMARA Lire la suite »

PARAZEET recognized distinctive for antiparasitic goods for French consumers

OHIM Cancellation Board – February 2010 – PARAZEET The OHIM was ceased of a cancellation demand against Community trademark PARAZEET n° 1358027 registered in class 5 especially for “preparations for destroying vermin; antiparasitic preparations, parasiticides, fungicides, herbicides, etc” The ground invoked was the non distinctiveness as the term PARAZEET could be pronounced PARASITE by French

PARAZEET recognized distinctive for antiparasitic goods for French consumers Lire la suite »

Comparison of trademarks with matching prefixes and suffixes

The OHIM has recently issued a couple of decisions of Opposition showing a tendency of the Community practice to rule trademark similarity when the signs retrieve the same starting and endings couple of letters. These decisions took no account of how the medium elements of the mark affect / modify the overall appearance of the

Comparison of trademarks with matching prefixes and suffixes Lire la suite »