In a decision dated April 9, 2019, Aalst Chocolate Pte Ltd (applicant) unsuccessfully challenged the validity of a trademark registration for a stylized version of the words “The Patissier” (the subject mark). Aalst Chocolate Pte Ltd v. The Patissier LLP [2019] SGIPOS 7. The applicant is a Singaporean chocolate manufacturer and exporter. The Patissier LLP […]
SINGAPORE: Guess? Inc.’s Inverted Triangle Found to Be More Dissimilar Than Similar to Applicant’s Mark
The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore issued its decision on February 27, 2019, rejecting Guess? Inc.’s (opponent) opposition to a triangle device mark, holding that it is more dissimilar than similar to the opponent’s earlier marks and that it would not cause confusion. Guess? Inc. v. Jen, Chi, [2019] SGIPOS 3. The opponent’s brand was […]
SINGAPORE: Decision Finds Jewelry Mark Containing ‘Love’ Is Distinctive
In a decision handed down on December 20, 2018, in MoneyMax Jewellery Pte. Ltd v. Cartier International AG, [2018] SGIPOS 22, the opponent, Cartier International AG, unsuccessfully opposed the registration of a mark by the applicant, MoneyMax Jewellery. The opponent initiated trademark opposition proceedings at the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) on July 28, […]
Apple Secures “IWATCH” Trademark Registration in Singapore
On 24 January 2019, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (“IPOS”) delivered its written judgement dismissing an opposition filed by Swatch AG (“SWATCH”) for the registration of the mark “IWATCH” filed by Apple Inc. (“Apple”). Swatch based its opposition on the grounds that “IWATCH” was confusingly similar to its earlier marks, “SWATCH” and “ ”, […]
Well Known Trademark Pierre Cardin Loses Final Battle in Indonesia Court
The long running dispute between Pierre Cardin (“Plaintiff”) and Alexander Satryo Wibowo (“Defendant”) finally reached its conclusion on 28 June 2018 (Supreme Court Decision No. 49 PK/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2018). The Plaintiff filed for a cancellation action against the Defendant for the registered trademarks PIERRE CARDIN wordmark and PIERRE CARDIN device in class 3. The grounds were (1) […]
Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. v Intercontinental Exchange Holdings Inc.
In a recent proceeding initiated by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. (CME), two trademarks “BRENT” and “BRENT INDEX” (“Subject Marks”) registered in the name of Intercontinental Exchange Holdings Inc. (ICE) were declared invalid by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore on 24th September 2018. The grounds of invalidity pleaded by CME were:- (1) The Subject […]
SINGAPORE: IP Office Emphasizes Understanding of Average Consumer in Assessing Similarity
In Monster Energy Company v. NBA Properties, Inc. [Sept. 5, 2018] SGIPOS 16, Monster (the opponent) unsuccessfully opposed registration of NBA’s (the applicant’s) composite mark comprising a circular device bearing the words TORONTO RAPTORS at the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS). The opponent relied on its claw device and composite device against NBA’s application. […]
Singapore - Similarity of Trade Marks Between Apple and Swatch Dismissed
In Apple Inc. v Swatch AG (Swatch S.A.) (Swatch Ltd.) [2018] SGIPOS 15, Apple Inc. (the ‘Opponent’) opposed the application to register the mark ‘Tick Different’ (the ‘Application Mark’) in Classes 9 and 14 made by Swatch AG (‘the Applicant’). The Opponent contended that the mark’s registration should be refused due to similarity with its […]
Singapore Trademark Revocation: Athleta Cannot Escape on Foot
In Bigfoot Internet Ventures Pte. Ltd. v Athleta (ITM) Inc. [2018] SGIPOS 10 (decision issued 2nd July 2018), a Singapore-registered trade mark held by a large American clothing conglomerate was partially revoked on grounds of non-use. The mark “ATHLETA” (the “Proprietors’ Mark”), owned by Athleta (ITM) Inc. (“the Proprietors”) - a wholly-owned subsidiary of US […]
Monster Fails in Another Singapore Trademark Opposition Case
For the fourth time in less than 12 months, Monster Energy Company (‘MEC’) initiated trademark opposition proceedings at the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) with the aim at preventing another party’s registration of a mark containing the word “MONSTER”. In this case, MEC, the proprietor of the mark “MONSTER ENERGY”, challenged its most high-profile […]