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) 3 designated goods: Unprocessed or semi-processed precious metals, precious metal products, bail, precious metal products, sculptures, typocks, typons, typorries, typines, oral straws, Mano, clocks, arm’s lengths, spheres, electric spheres, and implied poles, classified as the category of goods;
B. On March 5, 2018, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office (No. 1, 39, and 40 No. 1) notified the Plaintiff of the submission of a written opinion on July 3, 2018, that “The trademark of this case constitutes a simple and shaking mark, which is easily perceived as an English Alphabab, constitutes a trademark, and it is not possible for ordinary consumers to obtain trademark registration pursuant to Article 33(1)6 and 7 of the Trademark Act, because the trademark of this case constitutes a mark which is not recognizable as a trademark indicating the goods related to a person’s business (Evidence 39. 2). The Plaintiff submitted a written opinion on July 3, 2018, but the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office rejected the application on the ground that the above grounds for rejection was not resolved even if the written opinion was reviewed on August 30, 2018.
(A) On September 28, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against the decision of refusal with the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board (2018 won4043). However, on August 30, 2019, the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on the ground that “the trademark applied for registration of this case constitutes only a simple and ordinary mark, and constitutes Article 33(1)6 of the Trademark Act” (Article 33(1)6 of the Trademark Act). [In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, the respective descriptions of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 39, and 40, and the purport of the entire pleadings.”
2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the trademark of this case is in the shape of “teice pockets”, “brooms for home use” and “China-style knife” and is different from the “P” of the general letter, so it can be said simple, but it does not constitute a trademark under Article 33(1)6 of the Trademark Act.