News

Jul 8 2011
April 12, 2011 WIPO regional seminar for the CIS countries took place in Bishkek (Kirgizstan republic). Dr.Zalesov of Sojuzpatent Ltd. presented a topic “Client-attorney privilege in IP in Russia and abroad”. April 12, 2011 WIPO regional seminar for the CIS countries took place in Bishkek (Kirgizstan republic). Dr.Zalesov of Sojuzpatent Ltd. presented a topic “Client-attorney privilege in IP in Russia and abroad”.
Jul 8 2011
May 12, 2011 Sojuzpatent Ltd. organized IP seminar in Madrid (Spain) under the auspices of the Russia technology development exhibition (Ferria de Madrid) May 12, 2011 Sojuzpatent Ltd. organized IP seminar in Madrid (Spain) under the auspices of the Russia technology development exhibition (Ferria de Madrid)
Jul 8 2011
April 25, 2011 the annual meeting of the Russian Chamber of patent attorneys took place. Patent attorneys of Sojuzpatent Ltd. has been elected to the Board of organization. April 25, 2011 the annual meeting of the Russian Chamber of patent attorneys took place. Patent attorneys of Sojuzpatent Ltd. has been elected to the Board of organization.
Jun 30 2011
Magazine “Industrial property” #1, 2011 published an article “Reviewing of claims in Chamber for Patent Disputes as reexamination of patentability of industrial property objects” written by Aleksey Zalesov.
Jun 30 2011
June 23, 2011 the Moscow Arbitration Court took a decision in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client GmbH. «Liqui-Moly Gesellschaft mit beschrankter Haftung» (Germany) (the Plaintiff). By the mentioned decision the Court fully satisfied the claims of GmbH. «Liqui-Moly Gesell-schaft mit beschrankter Haftung» and ruled: - to forbid Closed Joint Stock Company "Obninskorgsintez" to use the designation «SINTOIL» which is similar to a degree of confusion with the Plaintiff’s trademark (international registration number 767 230) on the packaging of motor oils while manufacturing, introducing into civil circulation and offering for sale; - to forbid Ltd. “Logo-Auto” to use the designation “SINTOIL” on the packages of motor oils during the sale; - to oblige “Obninskorgsintez” to destroy the packages of motor oils marked by designation “SINTOIL” at their own expense and to withdraw in favor of the Plaintiff compensation for the infringement of the exclusive rights for the trademark from both Defendants.
Jun 30 2011
23.06.2011 the Appeal Arbitration Court for Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client – a German company producing sport cars – and affirmed the decision of the Moscow Ar-bitration Court of April 20, 2011 according to which the Court ruled to make private entrepre-neur Chernus G.V. (the Defendant) answerable for the unlawful use of a trademark, to recover from the defendant compensation at the rate of 10 000 rubles, to confiscate the goods, which is the subject of an administrative offence, as well as to recover from the Defendant in favor of the Applicant (the Moscow customs) expenses for expert examination at the rate of 35 000 rubles.
Jun 30 2011
«Intellectual trends» magazine, 2, 2011 published and article “Overview of IP litigation” prepared by Sojuzpatent litigation team
Jun 6 2011
May 30, 2011 Arbitration Court of the Moscow District ruled in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client “GEDEON RICHTER NIRT” (Hungary). By the said Ruling the Court affirmed the Resolution of the Appeal Arbitration Court for Ninth Circuit as of February 14, 2011 and the Decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court as of October 20, 2011 according to which is rejected the claim to invalidate the Decision of RUPTO, by which the Eurasian patent No EA 008223 was invalidated. May 30, 2011 Arbitration Court of the Moscow District ruled in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client “GEDEON RICHTER NIRT” (Hungary). By the said Ruling the Court affirmed the Resolution of the Appeal Arbitration Court for Ninth Circuit as of February 14, 2011 and the Decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court as of October 20, 2011 according to which is rejected the claim to invalidate the Decision of RUPTO, by which the Eurasian patent No EA 008223 was invalidated.
Apr 5 2011
April 05, 2011 the Appeal Arbitration Court for Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION (Japan) (Plaintiff) and affirmed the Decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court as of January 13, 2011 according to which the claims of SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION are fully satisfied and the Defendant (Ltd. “Iks-Technology”) is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff compensation in the amount of 1 000 000,00 rubles for the violation of the exclusive rights for the trademark “EPSON” (registration certificate No 162594) and to stop the violation of the Plaintiff’s exclusive rights, and the packages of goods marked by the designation “EPSON” should be withdrawn from the Defendant and destroyed at the expense thereof. April 05, 2011 the Appeal Arbitration Court for Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION (Japan) (Plaintiff) and affirmed the Decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court as of January 13, 2011 according to which the claims of SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION are fully satisfied and the Defendant (Ltd. “Iks-Technology”) is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff compensation in the amount of 1 000 000,00 rubles for the violation of the exclusive rights for the trademark “EPSON” (registration certificate No 162594) and to stop the violation of the Plaintiff’s exclusive rights, and the packages of goods marked by the designation “EPSON” should be withdrawn from the Defendant and destroyed at the expense thereof.
Mar 24 2011
March 24, 2011 the Moscow Arbitration Court took a decision in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client Ltd. “Cariba” (Defendant). By the said Decision Moscow Arbitration Court rejected the claims of Closed Joint Stock Company “HELP” (Plaintiff) of obliging Ltd. "Cariba” to pay to the Plaintiff compensation in the amount of 3 100 000,00 rubles and of stopping use the verbal designation “TIKIBAR” and graphic designation , similar to the degree of confusion with the Plaintiff’s trademarks registration certificates No 383752 and No 382343. March 24, 2011 the Moscow Arbitration Court took a decision in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client Ltd. “Cariba” (Defendant). By the said Decision Moscow Arbitration Court rejected the claims of Closed Joint Stock Company “HELP” (Plaintiff) of obliging Ltd. "Cariba” to pay to the Plaintiff compensation in the amount of 3 100 000,00 rubles and of stopping use the verbal designation “TIKIBAR” and graphic designation , similar to the degree of confusion with the Plaintiff’s trademarks registration certificates No 383752 and No 382343.
Mar 13 2011
March 13, 2010 the Federal Arbitration Court of the Moscow District ruled in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client BAUSCH & LOMB INCORPORATED (USA) (Plaintiff). By the mentioned Ruling the Court dismissed the appeal of Ltd. “Fitora” and Ltd. “Inat-Pharma” (Defendants) and affirmed the Resolution of the Appeal Arbitration Court for Ninth Circuit as of December 7, 2010. By this Resolution of December 7, 2010 the Appeal Arbitration Court for Ninth Circuit satisfied the appeal of BAUSCH & LOMB INCORPORATED and ruled: - to forbid the Defendants to use designations «ÎĘÎÂČŇ» č «OKOvit» which are similar to a degree of confusion with the Plaintiff’s trademark «OCUVITE» (registration certificate RF 174991); - to withdraw in favor of BAUSCH & LOMB INCORPORATED compensation for the infringement of the exclusive rights for the trademark in the amount of 100 000,00 rubles; - to withdraw from the turnover and to destroy the packages of the goods marked by designations «ÎĘÎÂČŇ» and «OKOvit». March 13, 2010 the Federal Arbitration Court of the Moscow District ruled in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client BAUSCH & LOMB INCORPORATED (USA) (Plaintiff). By the mentioned Ruling the Court dismissed the appeal of Ltd. “Fitora” and Ltd. “Inat-Pharma” (Defendants) and affirmed the Resolution of the Appeal Arbitration Court for Ninth Circuit as of December 7, 2010. By this Resolution of December 7, 2010 the Appeal Arbitration Court for Ninth Circuit satisfied the appeal of BAUSCH & LOMB INCORPORATED and ruled: - to forbid the Defendants to use designations «ÎĘÎÂČŇ» č «OKOvit» which are similar to a degree of confusion with the Plaintiff’s trademark «OCUVITE» (registration certificate RF 174991); - to withdraw in favor of BAUSCH & LOMB INCORPORATED compensation for the infringement of the exclusive rights for the trademark in the amount of 100 000,00 rubles; - to withdraw from the turnover and to destroy the packages of the goods marked by designations «ÎĘÎÂČŇ» and «OKOvit».
Jan 27 2011
Journal “World Intellectual Property Review” (edition 2011) published article “Pros and Cons of Patent Litigation in Russia” by Dr. Zalesov. >>LINK<< Journal “World Intellectual Property Review” (edition 2011) published article “Pros and Cons of Patent Litigation in Russia” by Dr. Zalesov. >>LINK<<
Dec 7 2010
December 7, 2010 Moscow Central Convention Hall “EXPOCENTER” hosted the Second International Forum on Intellectual Property “ExpoPriority”, in which Aleksey Zalesov, Ph.D., Registered Patent Attorney, Deputy General Director, Head of Legal Department of Sojuzpatent participated as the Chairman of the section "Legal Protection of Means of Individualisation". December 7, 2010 Moscow Central Convention Hall “EXPOCENTER” hosted the Second International Forum on Intellectual Property “ExpoPriority”, in which Aleksey Zalesov, Ph.D., Registered Patent Attorney, Deputy General Director, Head of Legal Department of Sojuzpatent participated as the Chairman of the section "Legal Protection of Means of Individualisation".
Dec 2 2010
December 2, 2010 – December 5, 2010 the Annual BRIC IP Forum “The Challenges of Securing Intellectual Property Rights in Emerging Markets” was held in Rio-de-Janeiro (Brazil). Sojuzpatent’s employees Dr. Zalesov and Dr. Isaev pariticipated in this Forum. December 2, 2010 – December 5, 2010 the Annual BRIC IP Forum “The Challenges of Securing Intellectual Property Rights in Emerging Markets” was held in Rio-de-Janeiro (Brazil). Sojuzpatent’s employees Dr. Zalesov and Dr. Isaev pariticipated in this Forum.
Nov 29 2010
November 29, 2010 the Appeal Arbitration Court for Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client SOREMARTEC S.A. (Belgium) (Plaintiff) and affirmed the Decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court as of July 9, 2010 according to which the claims of SOREMARTEC S.A. are fully satisfied and the Defendant is obliged to stop violation of the exclusive rights for the trademark under the international registration No 798984 by way of stopping the sale of biscuits “PRALINKI COCONUT LUX”. November 29, 2010 the Appeal Arbitration Court for Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client SOREMARTEC S.A. (Belgium) (Plaintiff) and affirmed the Decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court as of July 9, 2010 according to which the claims of SOREMARTEC S.A. are fully satisfied and the Defendant is obliged to stop violation of the exclusive rights for the trademark under the international registration No 798984 by way of stopping the sale of biscuits “PRALINKI COCONUT LUX”.
Nov 26 2010
November 26, 2010 The Chamber for the Patent Disputes of the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks issued a decision to satisfy the objection of Sojuzpatent’s client LLC “Kia Motors Rus” against the grant of a patent RF ą 83976 "Mechanism for transferring electrical signals and return of the lever blinker indicator. Patent RU 83976 is invalidated completely due to the discrepancy of the utility model to the condition of patentability “novelty”, established by art. 1351 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The utility model is not new, because the sum of its essential features at the priority date was known from the prior art, namely from the information about the use by LLC “Kia Motors Rus" in the Russian Federation of means of the same purpose as the claimed utility model. November 26, 2010 The Chamber for the Patent Disputes of the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks issued a decision to satisfy the objection of Sojuzpatent’s client LLC “Kia Motors Rus” against the grant of a patent RF ą 83976 "Mechanism for transferring electrical signals and return of the lever blinker indicator. Patent RU 83976 is invalidated completely due to the discrepancy of the utility model to the condition of patentability “novelty”, established by art. 1351 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The utility model is not new, because the sum of its essential features at the priority date was known from the prior art, namely from the information about the use by LLC “Kia Motors Rus" in the Russian Federation of means of the same purpose as the claimed utility model.
Nov 17 2010
November 17, 2010 - The Chamber for the Patent Disputes of the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks (RUPTO) issued a decision to satisfy the objection of Sojuzpatent’s client LLC “Kia Motors Rus” against the grant of patent RU 36274 for the utility model “Leaf material”. Patent RU 36274 is invalidated completely due to the discrepancy of the utility model to the condition of patentability “novelty”, established by art. 5 of the Patent Law of the Russian Federation. The utility model is not new, because the sum of its essential features at the priority date was known from the prior art, namely from the information about the use by LLC “Kia Motors Rus" in the Russian Federation of means of the same purpose as the claimed utility model. November 17, 2010 - The Chamber for the Patent Disputes of the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks (RUPTO) issued a decision to satisfy the objection of Sojuzpatent’s client LLC “Kia Motors Rus” against the grant of patent RU 36274 for the utility model “Leaf material”. Patent RU 36274 is invalidated completely due to the discrepancy of the utility model to the condition of patentability “novelty”, established by art. 5 of the Patent Law of the Russian Federation. The utility model is not new, because the sum of its essential features at the priority date was known from the prior art, namely from the information about the use by LLC “Kia Motors Rus" in the Russian Federation of means of the same purpose as the claimed utility model.
Pages:  ...  2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9    10    11    12    13    14  »

Legal address:
5/2, Il`inka str.,
Moscow, Russia, 109012

Post address:
h.13, b.5, Myasnitskaya str.
Moscow, Russia, 101000

Phones:
+7 (495) 221-88-80, 221-88-81

Faxes:
+7 (495) 221-88-85, 221-88-86

E-mail:
info@sojuzpatent.com

Company news
Jun 16 2017

Moscow Arbitration Court approved an Amicable Agreement in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client – FERRERO S.p.A. (Italy) in a trademark infringement case. 

Read more
May 25 2017

Sojuzpatent’s team of ten professionals took part in the 139th INTA Annual Meeting in Barcelona, Spain. During the event, Sojuzpatent hosted a booth at the Convention Center.

Read more
May 24 2017

The Arbitration Court of Pskovskay Region approved an Amicable Agreement in favor of Sojuzpatent’s client – FERRERO S.p.A. (Italy) in a trademark infringement case.  

Read more

Read all news »