Scribd
Upload
156 views3 pages

Clinical

The response summarizes the following: 1. It responds to a registrability report raising an objection that the mark is descriptive. It argues the mark is not exclusively descriptive due to the device component and unusual combination of words. 2. It confirms the applicant does not wish to claim colors for the mark. 3. It submits a copy of a foreign registration as evidence of priority claim and requests the application be given due course based on the foreign registration.

Uploaded by

Camille Palma
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
156 views3 pages

Clinical

The response summarizes the following: 1. It responds to a registrability report raising an objection that the mark is descriptive. It argues the mark is not exclusively descriptive due to the device component and unusual combination of words. 2. It confirms the applicant does not wish to claim colors for the mark. 3. It submits a copy of a foreign registration as evidence of priority claim and requests the application be given due course based on the foreign registration.

Uploaded by

Camille Palma
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Agent Code: 8015

Our Ref.: INTEL87 TM 13885


March 16, 2017
THE DIRECTOR OF TRADEMARKS
Intellectual Property Office
#28 Upper McKinley Road
McKinley Hill Town Center
Fort Bonifacio, Taguig City

Re: Applicant : CSHE Australia Pty. Ltd.


Trademark :

Appln. No. : 4-2016-013443


Date Filed : November 3, 2016

Document : T031
Title : Response to Registrability Report
Agent Code : 8015
-----------------------------------------------------------

RESPONSE TO REGISTRABILITY REPORT

Gentlemen:

This is by way of Response to Registrability Report with mailing date of


January 17, 2017.
2

1. The Examiner specifically raised the following objection:

“The mark may not be registered because:

- it consists exclusively of signs or of indications that may serve in trade to


designate the kind, quality, intended purpose or other characteristics of
the goods. (Sec. 123.1[j])”

Applicant argues that the mark is not exclusively descriptive but has
distinct and unusual qualities arising from the device component in combination with the
fancy juxtaposition of the other words in the mark.

Moreover, what is prohibited under Section 123.1(j) of the Intellectual Property


Code of the Philippines is a mark which “[c]onsists exclusively of signs or of indications
that may serve in trade to designate the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value,
geographical origin, time or production of the goods or rendering of the services, or
other characteristics of the goods or services.” Applying the foregoing, the mark

clearly does NOT consist EXCLUSIVELY of signs or of indications that


describe the kind, quality, intended purpose or other characteristics of “skincare

preparations, et al.” because evidently, the mark is a mixture of


components, i.e., a flower device, which is the dominant feature thereof and the words
“PURE. PROVEN. PERFECT.” Thus, due to the presence of the device and other

accompanying words, the mark as a whole is not descriptive of the goods


covered thereby.

2. The Examiner also requires applicant to give the specific name of colors
to be claimed.

Applicant manifests that it does not wish to claim colors for the mark

and requests that a black-and-white reproduction of said mark be recorded


in the above-captioned application.

3. The Examiner further requires applicant to submit a copy of the foreign


registration as evidence of claim of priority and its English translation, if the document is
not in English.
3

Applicant submits herewith as Annex “A” and makes an integral part hereof a

copy of Australian Certificate of Registration No. 1768642 for the mark .


Accordingly, the above-captioned application in the Philippines should also be allowed.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, the foregoing premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed


from this Honorable Office that this Response be noted and that the above-captioned
application be now given due course.

Applicant further prays for other reliefs that are just and equitable under the
premises.

Makati City for Taguig City, Metro Manila, March 16, 2017.

Very truly yours,

MONICA G. BUGAYONG ENRICO B. ASTUDILLO

/ggb

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy