logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 특허법원 2020.05.29 2019허7924
거절결정(상)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

(a) Composition B/C 2: 3) Designated goods: An applicant: four-day management business of a arching institute, Meaking school management business, beauty art education business, beauty art brokerage business, cosmetic technical guidance franchise business, beauty art guidance business, beauty art technical guidance business, beauty-related education business, beauty art-related vocational training, beauty-related vocational training, beauty art education, beauty-related practice instruction business, beauty-specialized driving school business, beauty art specialized driving school business, franchise business, beauty-specialized driving school business, beauty art-related vocational education and training instructor business, beauty-related vocational education and training instructor business, beauty-related vocational education and training instructor business, beauty-related teaching institute business, beauty-related education guidance business, and skin management guidance business of a skin management institute:

(b) 1) Date of prior registered trademark 1(A)/registration date/registration number: 3) Composition of the Category D/E/F (B): Native license, cosmetics, K2 cosmetics, cosmetics for bathing, cosmetics, cream, excluding cosmetics and medical treatment, Cream, hegel, felgel, libbs, libbbs, humbs, humbbs, humbs, humbs, humbs, hyecs, hye, hyecs: 2A) / Filing date of registration / registration / registration number : (c) 3) : The designated goods of the holder of a right, including H/I/J (H/J) : C: Baz, cosmetics, cosmetic, Cine products, excluding cosmetics, G gyec, gyec, gyec, gyec, gyer/Hel, gye.

C. As to the Plaintiff’s application for registration of the applied trademark, the Korean Intellectual Property Office examiner notified the Plaintiff of the grounds for rejection that the trademark applied for registration falls under Article 34(1)7 of the Trademark Act in relation to the relationship between 1-3, etc. of the pre-registered trademark and gave the Plaintiff an opportunity to submit a written opinion, etc., and then submitted by the Plaintiff on October 11, 2018.

arrow