{"id":2901,"date":"2019-03-15T12:39:25","date_gmt":"2019-03-15T12:39:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/aaalaw.lv\/insights\/code-coco-vs-code-decision-of-the-board-of-appeal-of-industrial-property-5-november-2018\/"},"modified":"2022-10-26T12:27:36","modified_gmt":"2022-10-26T12:27:36","slug":"code-coco-vs-code-decision-of-the-board-of-appeal-of-industrial-property-5-november-2018","status":"publish","type":"insights","link":"https:\/\/aaalaw.lv\/en\/insights\/code-coco-vs-code-decision-of-the-board-of-appeal-of-industrial-property-5-november-2018\/","title":{"rendered":"CODE COCO vs. CODE &#8211; Decision of the Board of Appeal of Industrial Property (5 November, 2018)"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"featured_media":1287,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"template":"","services":[20],"topics":[71],"class_list":["post-2901","insights","type-insights","status-publish","hentry","services-trademarks-design","topics-news"],"acf":{"insights_1_short_description":"On 5 November, 2018 the Board of Appeal of Industrial Property examined the opposition filed in the name of the Swiss company Chanel SARL against the Latvian trademark registration No. M 72 213 \u201cCODE\u201d (opposition directed only against the goods in class 14) registered in the name of the company\u2013 Grigorius Holdings, SIA.","insights_1_description":"On 5 November, 2018 the Board of Appeal of Industrial Property examined the opposition filed in the name of the Swiss company Chanel SARL against the Latvian trademark registration No. M 72 213 \u201cCODE\u201d (opposition directed only against the goods in class 14) registered in the name of the company\u2013 Grigorius Holdings, SIA. Our trademark attorneys <a href=\"https:\/\/petpat.lv\/en_lv\/employee\/gunta-zarina\/\">Gunta Zari\u0146a<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/petpat.lv\/en_lv\/employee\/kristine-ostrovska\/\">Krist\u012bne Ostrovska<\/a> represented the opponent Chanel SARL in this opposition matter. The opposition was based on confusing similarity of \u201cCODE\u201d trademark to the opponent\u2019s earlier trademark registration \u201cCODE COCO\u201d (reg. No. WO 1\u00a0315\u00a0533).\r\n\r\nHaving reviewed the case on the merits and taking into account the arguments and evidence provided in this matter, the Board of Appeal decided to satisfy the opposition. Accordingly the contested trademark registration No. M 72 213 \u201cCODE\u201d was invalidated with respect to goods in class 14.","insights_1_authors":[2496],"insights_2_type":"Sticky","insights_2_title":"","insights_2_button":"","insights_2_hidden":true},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/aaalaw.lv\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insights\/2901","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/aaalaw.lv\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insights"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/aaalaw.lv\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/insights"}],"acf:post":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aaalaw.lv\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/team\/2496"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aaalaw.lv\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1287"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/aaalaw.lv\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2901"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"services","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aaalaw.lv\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/services?post=2901"},{"taxonomy":"topics","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aaalaw.lv\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/topics?post=2901"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}