JP Appeal Judge on famous mark_WiiFIT

Trademark:ＷｉｉＦＩＴ
Class: 12
Appeal No.2008-900512
Type of appeal: opposition
Result: shall be canclled the registration
Judgement date: 2009/11/9
Key Point: -
Relevant article: 4-1-15
contents of article: "Notwithstanding the preceding Article, no trademark shall be registered if the trademark: is likely to cause confusion in connection with the goods or services pertaining to a business of another person (except those listed in items (x) to (xiv) inclusive);"

JP Appeal Judge on similarity_ "LEDs magazine"

Trademark:ＬＥＤｓ
Class: 16
Appeal No.2009-650101
Type of appeal: appeal against decision of refusal
Result: shall be registered
Judgement date: 2009/12/14
Key Point: "LEDs" is not read as "reds"
Relevant article: 4-1-11
contents of article: Notwithstanding the preceding Article, no trademark shall be registered if the trademark is identical with, or similar to, another person's registered trademark which has been filed prior to the filing date of an application for registration of the said trademark, if such a trademark is used in connection with the designated goods or designated services relating to the said registered trademark; the same shall apply hereinafter), or goods or services similar thereto

Japan_first fraud case for trademark act

A Japanese guy, representative of Japanese electric company arrested for filing false evidence of use when his trademark registration was filed a trial for cancellation based on non-use.
issue date: 2010/10/06

JP Appeal Judge on similarity_ "JELLYROLL" and "JULY ROLL"

Class: 9
Appeal No.2009-10943
Type of appeal: appeal against decision of refusal
Result: shall be registered
Judgement date: 2010/1/28
Key Point: common in vowel
Relevant article: 4-1-11
contents of article: Notwithstanding the preceding Article, no trademark shall be registered if the trademark is identical with, or similar to, another person's registered trademark which has been filed prior to the filing date of an application for registration of the said trademark, if such a trademark is used in connection with the designated goods or designated services relating to the said registered trademark; the same shall apply hereinafter), or goods or services similar thereto

India_IP office accepts petition on removed cases by non-payment of renwal until 2010/11/30

Opportunity to file petitions in case of complaints regarding removal of registered trade marks due to non-payment of renewal fees is provided by the IP office. Such opportunity of giving a representation by way of a petition together with the　prescribed fee of Rs.2,500/- (in terms of Entry NO.58 of the First Schedule to the　Trade Marks Rules, 2002) may be tendered along with full case history and with　cogent reasons non-renewal (in the case of agent) and other supporting　documents if any to the Appropriate Office within two months from the date　of this Public Notice for consideration of the petition by the designated officer. It　may be mentioned that there is no practice at present to re-open a lapsed mark　beyond the first cycle of renewal date. A speaking order will be issued in each　such case after a hearing.
reference: India IP office
http://www.ipindia.nic.in/iponew/publicNnotice_Petition_24September2010.pdf

Issue date: September 24, 2010

JP Appeal Judge on similarity_ "TOWERX" and "tower"

Class: 9
Appeal No.2009-10900
Type of appeal: appeal against decision of refusal
Result: shall be registered
Judgement date: 2010/1/28
Key Point: pronunciation of the present mark should be deemed as "TOWERX" only.
Relevant article: 4-1-11
contents of article: Notwithstanding the preceding Article, no trademark shall be registered if the trademark is identical with, or similar to, another person's registered trademark which has been filed prior to the filing date of an application for registration of the said trademark, if such a trademark is used in connection with the designated goods or designated services relating to the said registered trademark; the same shall apply hereinafter), or goods or services similar thereto

JP Appeal Judge on similarity_ "M_st"

Class: 41
Appeal No.2009-6711
Type of appeal: appeal against decision of refusal
Result: shall be registered
Judgement date: 2010/2/1
Key Point: the present mark should be deemed as a device not consisting specific words.
Relevant article: 4-1-11
contents of article: Notwithstanding the preceding Article, no trademark shall be registered if the trademark is identical with, or similar to, another person's registered trademark which has been filed prior to the filing date of an application for registration of the said trademark, if such a trademark is used in connection with the designated goods or designated services relating to the said registered trademark; the same shall apply hereinafter), or goods or services similar thereto