The application was published in the Official Gazette number 1281, dated March 2016, subject to the opposition period of 60 days.

An opposition was filed by Intercontinental Great Brands LLC against our client’s application on the basis of:

• Similarity between our client’s mark ULKER ONEO and the opponent’s mark OREO in terms of pronunciation, general appearance, and designated class;
• The opponent claimed that they were the real owner of the trademark OREO at home country, abroad, and in Kuwait since 2006;
• Allowing the registration of ULKER ONEO contradicts with the national law and international conventions, and
• The opponent claims that the registration of our client’s mark will mislead the public about the origin of the products.

Accordingly, we filed a counter statement on behalf of our client based on:

• Dissimilarity between our client’s mark and the opponent’s mark in terms of pronunciation and general appearance;
• Our client’s mark was filed in class 30 to cover the item “chewing gums” only, while the opponent’s mark was used for “biscuits products”, and
• Our client’s mark is well-known and established in Turkey since 1989.

After reviewing the respective statements, the Registrar issued its decision in our client’s favour and ruled to allow ULKER ONEO to register.

The opponent had the legal right to appeal the decision before the Court within 30 days from the date of issuance of said decision. The Opponent exercised its right before the Court within the timeframe. The Court, however, ruled in favor of our client confirming the Registrar’s decision.

For more information, please contact kuwait@qumsieh.com.

Our client, Yildiz Holding Inc, is the legal owner of “ULKER Deluxe” registered in Turkey and worldwide including Yemen in class 30.

Through our watching service, it came to our attention that a similar trademark for DELUX was filed in Yemen in Latin and Arabic characters by a local trader. Our client instructed us to file an opposition against said application.

Our opposition was based on the following:

1. Prior registration of ULKER Deluxe by our client in Yemen since 30 May 2010, while the opposed mark was filed on 23 October 2013;
2. Prior use of our client’s mark in Yemen since 2011;
3. The main element of our client’s trademark is the word DELUXE;
4. Similarity between both marks will confuse the public about the origins of the products, and
5. Allowing the registration of the infringing mark will lead to unfair competition between the owner of such mark and our client.

The applicant of the opposed mark failed to respond to the opposition within the legal time frame as specified by the Yemen trademark Law; accordingly, the Registrar considered the opposed mark as abandoned.

If you have any questions, please contact yemen@qumsieh.com.

The Iranian trader, Mr. Mahmoud Bihamta, and owner of trademark “TURK” No. 124164, dated 23 August 2005 has filed a cancellation action against the above application.

The plaintiff’s suit was based on the following:

• Similarity with his trademark “TURK”.
• Prior date of registration of his trademark in Iran.

In our defense argument, we have submitted evidences to the court involving the following:

• Our client has prior registration abroad (in Turkey in 2003) of his trademark to the plaintiff’s trademark.
• Our client’s trademark is registered in various countries in the world prior to the plaintiff’s trademark.
• Prior use by our client for his trademark.

After full litigation and considering the above, the presiding judge has issued a final verdict ruling in favor of our client’s over the plaintiff Mr. Mahmoud Bihamta, thereupon the latter’s case has been abolished.

If you have any questions regarding the above, kindly contact us at info@qumsieh.com.