{"id":2526,"date":"2022-10-26T11:06:14","date_gmt":"2022-10-26T08:06:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/?p=2526"},"modified":"2022-10-26T11:06:14","modified_gmt":"2022-10-26T08:06:14","slug":"successful-representation-of-the-client-in-a-trademark-cancellation-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/successful-representation-of-the-client-in-a-trademark-cancellation-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Successful representation of the client in a trademark cancellation case"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The lawyers of ARS-Patent represented the interests of a Chinese pharmaceutical company Chan Li Chai Medical Factory (Hong Kong) Limited as a plaintiff in a trademark cancellation action.<\/p>\n<p>The opposed trademark registration was an obstacle for registering the client\u2019s trademark in Russia.<\/p>\n<p>After consideration of the case No. <a href=\"https:\/\/kad.arbitr.ru\/Card\/3484b9b3-5b38-443b-953a-4f447a65d54b\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">SIP-911\/2021<\/a> the Court for Intellectual Property Rights issued a decision in favour of the company Chan Li Chai Medical Factory (Hong Kong) Limited, the legal protection of the opposed trademark was terminated due to non-use.<\/p>\n<p>The interests of the company Chan Li Chai Medical Factory (Hong Kong) Limited in the dispute were represented by the lawyers of ARS-Patent \u2013 <a href=\"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/our-team\/attorneys\/kirill-osipov\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Kirill Osipov<\/a> and Dmitry Smekhov.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The lawyers of ARS-Patent represented the interests of a Chinese pharmaceutical company Chan Li Chai Medical Factory (Hong Kong) Limited as a plaintiff in a trademark cancellation action. The opposed trademark registration was an obstacle for registering the client\u2019s trademark in Russia. After consideration of the case No. SIP-911\/2021 the Court for Intellectual Property Rights [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[19],"tags":[29,33,28,40,32,31,27,30],"post-type":[12],"class_list":["post-2526","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news-and-events","tag-court","tag-ip","tag-litigation","tag-osipov","tag-protection","tag-representation","tag-trademark","tag-win","post-type-news"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2526","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2526"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2526\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2527,"href":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2526\/revisions\/2527"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2526"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2526"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2526"},{"taxonomy":"post-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ars-patent.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/post-type?post=2526"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}