01 July, 2014
Spruson

Australian Trade Mark Office Decisions Summary May 2014

Australian Trade Mark Office Decisions Summary May 2014

Each month we produce a summary of the Australian Trade Marks Office decisions to provide practitioners and brand owners with a succinct, accessible database detailing current trends in Australian trade marks practice.

International Awards Group LLC v Asian Advertising Festival
(Spikes) Asia Pte Limited [2014] ATMO 35
Prior awards, todays rewards.



Opponent able to show prior use (section 58).
Read full article >>


Sitecore Corporation A/S v Salesforce.com, inc [2014] ATMO 37 FORCE is not the CORE of the matter.


Prior marks for SITECORE not sufficient to prevent registration of SITEFORCE application (sections 44 and 60).
Read full article >>


Citigroup Inc v City Index Limited [2014] ATMO 36 Survey says…CITI monopolises this town.


Citigroup successfully opposes CITY formative trade mark applications (section 60).
Read full article >>


Takeda GmbH v Actegy Limited [2014] ATMO 38 Same beginning and ending, same (or similar) trade mark.


REVITIVE partially refused in face of earlier REVESTIVE trade mark (section 44).
Read full article >>


Virgin Enterprises Limited v Sugar Virgin Pty Ltd [2014] ATMO 39 VIRGIN Sugar or Sugar VIRGIN. Would an application by any
other name be soo sweet?




VIRGIN trade mark denied in face of reputation of VIRGIN trade mark (sections 60 and 62).
Read full article >>


Qantas Airways Limited v Luke Edwards [2014] ATMO 40 Flying Kangaroo grounded in shirt-less incident.


Qantas unable to prevent registration of asserted “flying kangaroo” mark by third party in relation to clothing.
Read full article >>


Footwear Industries Pty Ltd v PT AlasmasBerkatUtama [2014] ATMO 41 HEELER is top dog.


Rare bad faith decision, where applicant’s knowledge of opponent’s business leads to imitation (section 62A).
Read full article >>


Donzenac Pty Ltd v MCV Enviroworks Pty Ltd [2014] ATMO 42 You say ECO, I say ENVIRO.


ECOBLANKET and ENVIROBLANKET found not to be deceptively similar, despite similarities (section 60).
Read full article >>


Pacific Brands Workwear Group Pty Ltd v J.T.C. Import/Export
Pty Ltd. [2014] ATMO 43
HARD YAKKA creates a good reputation.



Reputation in HARD YAKKA trade mark sufficient to prevent registration of YAKKA TOOLS (section 60).
Read full article >>


Laverana GmbH & Co. KG v Lalisse Australia Pty Ltd [2014] ATMO 44 Same beginning and ending, same (or similar) trade mark 2.0, or
Confusing LAVERA Solus (to the tune of Living La Vida Loca).




LAVIENA found to be similar to LAVERA and denied registration (section 44).
Read full article >>


Novartis AG v Alpha Helix Inc. [2014] ATMO 45 VOLTAREN soothes pain of confusion.


VOLTAGEN found to be too similar to VOLTAREN (section 60).
Read full article >>


Sears Brands LLC v Trio Group Australia Pty Ltd [2014] ATMO 46 TRIO no match for one imposing CRAFTMAN.


TRIO CRAFTSMAN denied registration in the face on CRAFTSMAN (section 44).
Read full article >>


Latest Tweets

Follow @sprusons on twitter.