(JP Patent) Fees for Patent Examination Requests to Be Revised Lower

The JPO decided to reduce the fee for patent examination request.
http://www.jpo.go.jp/cgi/linke.cgi?url=/tetuzuki_e/ryoukin_e/feespatent_revised.htm

Is "swaro" an abbreviation of swarovski?

Opposition 2010-900206

Decision: keep the registration.

           * Japan adopts after grant opposition system

Trademark: swaro beauty (device)

Owner of the mark: (Japanese company)

Opponent: Swarovski AG.

Class 10   Esthetic massage apparatus for household purposes;

Class 11   Electric apparatus for beauty for household purposes

Reason of opposition

Since the present mark contains a word “swaro,” which is equivalent to the well-known abbreviated name of “Swarovski,” registration of the present mark without getting permission by Swarovski AG shall not be registered.

Decision of the opposition

There is no evidence showing “Swaro” is well known to the public as an abbreviated name of the opponent. In addition, as words “swarobeauty” in the present mark has unity as a whole, it shall not be deemed third party’s abbereviated name is contained in the present mark.

Abercrombie's deer mark is not well known in Japan?

Opposition 2010-900177

Decision: keep the registration.

           * Japan adopts after grant opposition system

Owner of the mark: Urban Elk SPS.

Opponent: Abercrombie & Fitch Europe SA.

Class 18 Bags and the like, etc.

Reason of the opposition

Since the present mark is similar to the cited trademark which has been well known to the Japanese customers and this application was filed with a purpose of dishonest benefit, the present trademark right shall be canceled.

Reason of decision

The cited trademark was not deemed as well-known mark at the filing date of the present trademark (September 7, 2009), and the present trademark is deemed as NOT similar to the cited trademark in appearance, pronunciation and connotation. In addition, there are no evidences showing that the present trademark is used for the purpose of dishonest benefit, such as penalizing to Abercrombie & Fitch. Consequently, the present mark does not fall under Trademark Act Section 4 (1)19.

「KIDS」 is not distinctive word?

Appeal against decision of refusal No.2009-15059
Relevant article: Trademark law 4-1-11
Result: approval to register (not similar to the cited trademark)
Class 35
Decision date: September 28, 2010

<Reason of decision>
As the present mark consists of a word “Kids” with device, considering relation the mark with the designated services of the present application, “Kids” represents quality of services. The part of the mark "Kids" does not fulfill a function as a trademark. Therefore, it should be deemed that the present mark is NOT similar to the cited trademark.

Can you agree with this decision?