We are offering you a summarized review of opposition cases considered by the Lithuanian Appeal Board and published in the of the Lithuanian PTO Official Bulletin. We hope that this review will help you to get an idea of the current decision-making approaches of the Lithuanian Appeal Board.
Opposition cases are considered during oral hearings, where both parties produce their arguments and evidences and the Board makes its decisions weighing up the arguments of both parties. Local applicants or holders of marks are allowed to participate without a professional representative, while foreign applicants or holders not having residence in the European Community have to appoint a local representative (attorney).
For your convenience we have divided the cases into some groups. Where an opposition was based on more than one ground we chose the most important one but also mentioned the other motives for opposing.

I. Confusing similarity of marks
    A.  Word mark v word mark
             · in relation to goods in class 5
             · in relation to goods in other classes
     B.  Word mark v word and device mark
     C.  Device mark v word and device mark
     D.  Word and device mark v word mark
     E.  Word and device mark v word and device mark

II. Similarity of goods and services

III. Geographical indications and geographical names

IV. Similarity of trademarks to trade names

V. Inherent non-distinctiveness
    A. Ex Parte cases
    B. Inter Partes cases

VI. Marks contrary to morality
VII. Well-known marks
VIII. Colours
IX Personal names
X. Genericism

XI. Other earlier rights and bad faith

Home   |    About us   |   Our services   |   Legislation 
 Recent cases   |   Forms   |   FAQ   |   How to find us