beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. A. The registered design (A. 2 No. 1)/ the date of application/registration/registration number: B/C/D2: The certificate No. 2 of the Hague City shall be deemed to be “Hurleria,” but it shall be done in accordance with the correct external marking method.
(hereinafter the same shall apply)
3) Explanation and drawings of the design: The owner of the design right (attached Form 1-1): the plaintiff;
B. The date of application 1)/ the date of registration / the date of registration / the number of registration : the goods that are the subject of design E/F/D No. 1-2: the description and drawings of the design in Hague City 3: the owner of the design right (attached Form 1-2) 4: the Plaintiff
(c) Goods subject to confirmation (attached Form 2) 1 of the design subject to confirmation (attached Form 3): A description of the design and drawings (attached Form 2) of the Hague City;
D. 1) The comparative design 1 (No. 4) published on September 26, 2001 is a design relating to “HAIBR USH” published on September 26, 2001, which is registered on August 13, 2002 under the comparative design 2 (No. 5) registered on August 13, 2002 and published in the U.S. Design Gazette D461,316, and its drawings (attached Form 3-2).
3) On July 17, 2013, the Defendant filed a claim against the Intellectual Property Tribunal for a trial to confirm the scope of protection of a registered design by asserting that, “The design subject to confirmation does not fall under the scope of protection of the registered design of this case” in the magazines specializing in Sweden’s cremation, “Szkproph kat 98/99” in the U.S. Specialized Advertisement Book No. 3 (No. 6-8) of the U.S. Specialized Advertisement No. 3 (No. 3 (No. 6-8) design, and its photograph is related to the HURCE 200” respectively. (e) On July 17, 2013, the Defendant filed a claim against the Plaintiff for a trial to confirm the scope of protection of a registered design of this case.”
2. The Intellectual Property Tribunal shall conduct an examination of the above request for adjudication in the case of 2013Da1911, and on November 29, 2013.