News from good friends Saba & Co in their September 2015 bulletin (here) of amendments to the Standards and Metrology Organisation Law
Interesting items of news about Intellectual Property in the Middle East and North Africa reach even this tranquil corner of the vast emptiness that is the Empty Quarter
Thursday, 24 September 2015
Iran - enforcement
There is a summary of enforcement options in Iran from good friends Saba & Co in their September 2015 bulletin here.
Global Innovation Index 2015
In a notice (here) on 17 September 2015 WIPO released the Global Innovation Index 2015. The WIPO website page for the GII is here while the main GII page is here. The WIPO page states:
The Global Innovation Index (GII) ranks the innovation performance of 141 countries and economies around the world, based on 79 indicators. The GII is co-published by WIPO, Cornell University and INSEAD.
The GII 2015 explores the impact of innovation-oriented policies on economic growth and development. High-income and developing countries alike are seeking innovation-driven growth through different strategies. Some countries are successfully improving their innovation capacity, while others still struggle.
The Global Innovation Index (GII) ranks the innovation performance of 141 countries and economies around the world, based on 79 indicators. The GII is co-published by WIPO, Cornell University and INSEAD.
The GII 2015 explores the impact of innovation-oriented policies on economic growth and development. High-income and developing countries alike are seeking innovation-driven growth through different strategies. Some countries are successfully improving their innovation capacity, while others still struggle.
The main GII website allows the full report to be downloaded and read at your leisure (from here). The infographics page (here) is brightly coloured and provides lots of easily read information - not least of which are honourable mentions for Saudi Arabia (coming in third overall as a leader in innovation in the Northern Africa and Western Asia region) and the United Arab Emirates (as the leader in cluster developments).
The rankings page (here) allows the reader to filter by region and sort by each part of the report (covering everything from Institutions to School Life Expectancy).
There is comment here from Gulf News.
Tuesday, 15 September 2015
UAE - Trade Mark Office - trial of on line filing and renewals
News reaches this part of the Empty Quarter of an announcement yesterday by the Trade Mark Office of the trial of on line trade mark filing and trade mark renewal. The service is accessed through the Ministry of Economy website here or here.
There is a trial period from 13 September 2015 to 19 September 2015. There is no news of when the service might go live or when other services may be added.
This part of the Empty Quarter is delighted by this announcement and holds hope in his heart that it heralds a new era of the opening up of the Trade Mark Office so that information is readily accessible by all as it is in so many jurisdictions around the world.
There is a trial period from 13 September 2015 to 19 September 2015. There is no news of when the service might go live or when other services may be added.
This part of the Empty Quarter is delighted by this announcement and holds hope in his heart that it heralds a new era of the opening up of the Trade Mark Office so that information is readily accessible by all as it is in so many jurisdictions around the world.
Monday, 14 September 2015
Lebanon - WTH Mulford to close
Sad news has reached this part of the Empty Quarter that Mr David Meshaka passed away on 23 August 2015. Our condolences go to his family and colleagues. Following this sad news we have heard that the firm, WTH Mulford, will close in its current form and then arise phoenix like again under the same name. While the news is currently not clear, it appears that existing prosecution matters will be completed and the certificates sent out. However, the business is not accepting any new instructions. All those with matters currently with WTH Mulford should contact them for further news and advice.
Thursday, 10 September 2015
UAE - Dubai - "Dubai raids net record Dh195m in fake goods" reports The National
The front page of The National today reports "Dubai raids net record Dh195m in fake goods".
There is then an editorial piece "Fake goods are too prevalent".
There is then an editorial piece "Fake goods are too prevalent".
Wednesday, 9 September 2015
Saudi Arabia - possible increase to official fees for publication of trade mark renewals and assignments
News from NJQ:
"Expected Increase in the Official Publication Fees
It is expected that the official fees for the publication of renewals and recordal of assignments will be increased from 15 October 2015.
The old fees of said publication of assignments were SAR500 and for renewals SAR300; the new fees will become SAR3000 for both.
We recommend applying for any renewals and assignments as soon as possible to avoid the new increased fees.
If you have any questions, please contact us at saudi-arabia@qumsieh.com."
Further news from good friends Kadasa & Partners that there has been no official announcement but the rumours are that an increase will be announced when renewals become available through the on-line system, but that the amounts are still under discussion.
And news in the September bulletin from good friends Saba & Co here.
It is expected that the official fees for the publication of renewals and recordal of assignments will be increased from 15 October 2015.
The old fees of said publication of assignments were SAR500 and for renewals SAR300; the new fees will become SAR3000 for both.
We recommend applying for any renewals and assignments as soon as possible to avoid the new increased fees.
If you have any questions, please contact us at saudi-arabia@qumsieh.com."
Further news from good friends Kadasa & Partners that there has been no official announcement but the rumours are that an increase will be announced when renewals become available through the on-line system, but that the amounts are still under discussion.
And news in the September bulletin from good friends Saba & Co here.
WIPO Patentscope database now available in Arabic
News (here) from WIPO that the Patentscope database (here) is available to search in Arabic (here).
The WIPO website says that "The PATENTSCOPE database provides access to international Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) applications in full text format on the day of publication, as well as to patent documents of participating national and regional patent offices. The information may be searched by entering keywords, names of applicants, international patent classification and many other search criteria in multiple languages."
The news item says" The PATENTSCOPE search system is now available in Arabic in addition to the nine existing languages. It is now possible to do the following exclusively in Arabic:
Carry out searches
Browse search results
Log into your user account
Browse help and supporting pages
More advanced search features (e.g. stemming) will gradually become available in Arabic."
Wow, says this part of the Empty Quarter, that is a lot of really useful information in Arabic for inventors in the region.
The WIPO website says that "The PATENTSCOPE database provides access to international Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) applications in full text format on the day of publication, as well as to patent documents of participating national and regional patent offices. The information may be searched by entering keywords, names of applicants, international patent classification and many other search criteria in multiple languages."
The news item says" The PATENTSCOPE search system is now available in Arabic in addition to the nine existing languages. It is now possible to do the following exclusively in Arabic:
Carry out searches
Browse search results
Log into your user account
Browse help and supporting pages
More advanced search features (e.g. stemming) will gradually become available in Arabic."
Wow, says this part of the Empty Quarter, that is a lot of really useful information in Arabic for inventors in the region.
Tuesday, 8 September 2015
Tunisia - Decree No. 2015-303 on trade marks
News hot of the press from WIPO today that Decree No 2015-303 has been added to the WIPO Lex database (in Arabic and French). The notice reads:
The Decree No. 2015-303 of June 1, 2015, establishing the Procedures for the Registration of and Opposition to the Registration of Trademarks and Service Marks, as well as the Procedures concerning Recording in the National Register of Marks came into force on June 9, 2015, and repealed Decree No. 2001-1603 of July 11, 2001.
The Decree introduces the following modifications:
(i) introduction of electronic filing of applications for the registration of trademarks;
(ii) setting out of provisions governing the trademark registration through the Madrid Protocol;
(iii) extension during the opposition period of the time for the applicant to submit observations from 45 days to 2 months from the date of notification of the opposition;
(iv) fixation of a maximum period of 8 months from the date of submission of observations for the applicant and the opponent to attempt conciliation in the trademark opposition;
(v) extension to 2 months from 1 month of the period during which the opponent may furnish proof of the use of the trademarks upon which opposition has been based; and
(vi) definition of a period of 2 months for the applicant to submit the missing documents to request recording of a change of names, addresses, ownership, assignment, etc., in the National Register of Marks.
UPDATE
Here is an update from good friends Spoor & Fisher
Tunisia – Procedural changes dealing with trade mark applications and oppositions
Tunisia, a country that recently joined the Madrid Protocol, has made certain procedural changes to its trade mark law. These changes affect not only trade mark applications, but also trade mark oppositions, where an EU-style conciliation process exists. These changes are contained in a new decree, Decree No. 2015-303, which has replaced Decree No. 2001-1603.
The following changes have been brought about:
The Decree introduces the following modifications:
(i) introduction of electronic filing of applications for the registration of trademarks;
(ii) setting out of provisions governing the trademark registration through the Madrid Protocol;
(iii) extension during the opposition period of the time for the applicant to submit observations from 45 days to 2 months from the date of notification of the opposition;
(iv) fixation of a maximum period of 8 months from the date of submission of observations for the applicant and the opponent to attempt conciliation in the trademark opposition;
(v) extension to 2 months from 1 month of the period during which the opponent may furnish proof of the use of the trademarks upon which opposition has been based; and
(vi) definition of a period of 2 months for the applicant to submit the missing documents to request recording of a change of names, addresses, ownership, assignment, etc., in the National Register of Marks.
UPDATE
Here is an update from good friends Spoor & Fisher
Tunisia – Procedural changes dealing with trade mark applications and oppositions
Tunisia, a country that recently joined the Madrid Protocol, has made certain procedural changes to its trade mark law. These changes affect not only trade mark applications, but also trade mark oppositions, where an EU-style conciliation process exists. These changes are contained in a new decree, Decree No. 2015-303, which has replaced Decree No. 2001-1603.
The following changes have been brought about:
- There is provision for the electronic filing of trade mark applications, although we understand that such filings are not yet possible.
- There are provisions dealing with trade mark registration through the Madrid Protocol.
- The term within which the trade mark applicant can file observations to a trade mark opposition has been increased from 45 days to two months from the date of notification of the opposition.
- There is now an eight-month term from the date of submission of the observations within which the parties can seek conciliation of the opposition.
- The period within which an opponent may file proof of use of the trade mark on which the opposition is based is increased from one month to two months.
- There is now a two-month term for the filing of any documentation that may be required in order to support transactions such as a change of name, a change of address, or an assignment.
Eid Al Adha holidays 2015
News from good friends Kadasa & Partners that the public sector will be closed in Saudi Arabia from Friday 18 September 2015 to Monday 28 September 2015, returning to work on Tuesday 29 September 2015. These closures will affect the Saudi Trade Mark and Patent offices as well as the GCC Patent Office.
The UAE government has announced the Eid holidays will be 23/24/25 September 2015 for the private sector and 23/24/25/26 September 2015 for the public sector.
News from good friends Abdelhadi in Egypt that their firm and the government will be closed from Tuesday 22 September to Saturday 26 September 2015 and all deadlines falling with that period will be deferred to next working day, Sunday 27 September 2015.
News from good friends Deris in Turkey that their office will be closed on Wednesday 23, Thursday 24 and Friday 25 September for the holiday. They do not specifically state that the government will be closed on those dates.
Eid Mubarak!
The UAE government has announced the Eid holidays will be 23/24/25 September 2015 for the private sector and 23/24/25/26 September 2015 for the public sector.
News from good friends Abdelhadi in Egypt that their firm and the government will be closed from Tuesday 22 September to Saturday 26 September 2015 and all deadlines falling with that period will be deferred to next working day, Sunday 27 September 2015.
News from good friends Deris in Turkey that their office will be closed on Wednesday 23, Thursday 24 and Friday 25 September for the holiday. They do not specifically state that the government will be closed on those dates.
Eid Mubarak!
Tuesday, 25 August 2015
Iraq - a tale of two trade mark offices
News from good friends Saba & Co on their website that a trade mark registration issued by the Trade Mark Office in Baghdad can no longer be validated at the Trade Mark Office in Erbil. A separate application must now be filed at the Trade Mark Office in Erbil.
The update from Saba (here) reads:
"It is no longer possible for owners to validate registered trademarks at the Trademark Office in Baghdad up to the TMO in Erbil. Owner can now only file a separate application in the Kurdish region for additional local protection.
By way of background, there are two TMOs operating in Iraq: one in Baghdad and another in Erbil. In principle, the scope of the registration at the TMO in Baghdad still covers the whole country, including the Kurdish region. However, trademark owners may seek additional protection by filing applications at the TMO in Erbil. Protection in the Kurdish region is advisable in certain situations especially in an infringement claim. Trademark owners should of course seek sound advice before they decide on the best route to pursue.
Should you have any questions, or require any additional information, please contact us at info@sabaip.com"
"It is no longer possible for owners to validate registered trademarks at the Trademark Office in Baghdad up to the TMO in Erbil. Owner can now only file a separate application in the Kurdish region for additional local protection.
By way of background, there are two TMOs operating in Iraq: one in Baghdad and another in Erbil. In principle, the scope of the registration at the TMO in Baghdad still covers the whole country, including the Kurdish region. However, trademark owners may seek additional protection by filing applications at the TMO in Erbil. Protection in the Kurdish region is advisable in certain situations especially in an infringement claim. Trademark owners should of course seek sound advice before they decide on the best route to pursue.
Should you have any questions, or require any additional information, please contact us at info@sabaip.com"
Egypt - Patent Prosecution Highway pilot program with Japan
News from good friends Saba & Co in the their July 2015 newsletter (here) that the Egyptian Patent Office and the Japanese Patent Office began a two-year Patent Prosecution Highway program on 1 June 2015. The Patent Prosecution Highway allows an application that has been determined to be patentable in the Japanese Patent Office to undergo an accelerated examination in the Egyptian Patent Office with a simple procedure upon the applicant’s request.
There is more detail on the Saba website.
There is more detail on the Saba website.
Thursday, 20 August 2015
Oman - plant varieties
A useful, brief, summary from good friends Saba & Co in their June 2015 newsletter (here) on the publication of the implementing regulations of Royal Decree No. 49 of 2009 promulgating the Law on the Protection of Breeders’ Rights in New Varieties of Plants.
They report that:
They then include a useful summary table setting some information about Cyprus, Egypt, India, Iran, Jordan, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Turkey and the UAE.
They report that:
- applications may now be filed with the General Directorate for Plant and Animal Research at the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries.
- filing requirements stipulate that applications must include a title and a full description, along with seeds and any other information or samples that may be requested by the authorities concerned. The protection term is 25 years for trees and grapevines, and 20 years for other plant varieties.
- renewal fees will have to be paid annually from the filing date.
They then include a useful summary table setting some information about Cyprus, Egypt, India, Iran, Jordan, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Turkey and the UAE.
Labels:
Cyprus,
Egypt,
India,
Iran,
Jordan,
Morocco,
Oman,
plant varieties,
Saudi Arabia,
Tunisia,
Turkey,
UAE
Jordan - new drug and pharmacy law
A useful, brief, summary from good friends Saba & Co in their June 2015 newsletter (here) on the amendments to the Drug and Pharmacy Law No. 24 of 2015 that came into effect on May 18, 2015.
They report that the main amendments include sanctions imposed on the counterfeiting of medicine:
They report that the main amendments include sanctions imposed on the counterfeiting of medicine:
- the new law allows both imprisonment and a fine, whereas the old law imposed either imprisonment or a fine
- the fine for counterfeiting is now ten times the value of the fake products produced, whereas the old law only imposed a fine of twice the value
- the Food and Drug Administration is authorised to close down any shop, store, gym, or beauty centre that sells or trades in counterfeit or banned medicines or supplements.
Iran & Syria - what is allowed by US sanctions?
A useful, brief, summary from good friends Saba & Co in their June 2015 newsletter (here) on what transactions are authorised under US sanctions to Iran and Syria.
Yemen - a new weekend…..
News by email back in July 2015 from good friends SMAS that "the Yemeni government has recently issued a decree that confirms changing Yemen’s weekend from a Friday-Saturday to a Thursday-Friday schedule, giving Thursday as a weekend instead of Saturday. This decision came into effect on the 18th of June, 2015, and have been incorporated in all public sectors and should be implemented nationwide within the month.
For more information, please contact our Yemen office on Yemen@smas-ip.com"
This part of the Empty Quarter had thought that all countries in the region were now aligned on a Friday/Saturday weekend and well remembers the difficulties of managing work across a region where the weekend was not always the same, let alone always Friday/Saturday and hopes that, in due course, the weekend in Yemen might return to Friday/Saturday, although, of course, the choice is that of the Yemeni government.
For more information, please contact our Yemen office on Yemen@smas-ip.com"
This part of the Empty Quarter had thought that all countries in the region were now aligned on a Friday/Saturday weekend and well remembers the difficulties of managing work across a region where the weekend was not always the same, let alone always Friday/Saturday and hopes that, in due course, the weekend in Yemen might return to Friday/Saturday, although, of course, the choice is that of the Yemeni government.
GCC - Free Trade Agreement with EFTA
There is an interesting piece in the July 2015 newsletter of good friends Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP on the implementation of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Free Trade Association and the GCC countries.
In brief the implementation of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Free Trade Association and the Gulf Cooperation Council will result in greater movement of trade in goods, services and government procurement contracts, where member states shall receive ‘most favoured nation treatment.’ The full length article which sets out more information is on their website here.
In brief the implementation of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Free Trade Association and the Gulf Cooperation Council will result in greater movement of trade in goods, services and government procurement contracts, where member states shall receive ‘most favoured nation treatment.’ The full length article which sets out more information is on their website here.
Oman - Conducting Promotional Offers
There is an interesting piece in the July 2015 newsletter of good friends Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP on Conducting Promotional Offers in Oman.
In brief a commercial establishment is not to conduct or advertise any promotional offer until it has obtained a licence from the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. If a promotion is to take the form of a raffle which produces a prize winner, the licensee must inform the MOCI. The full length article which sets out more information including the penalties for violations is on their website here.
In brief a commercial establishment is not to conduct or advertise any promotional offer until it has obtained a licence from the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. If a promotion is to take the form of a raffle which produces a prize winner, the licensee must inform the MOCI. The full length article which sets out more information including the penalties for violations is on their website here.
Iraq - progress of trade mark applications
News from good friends SMAS of progress in examining trade mark applications in Iraq.
In September 2013 the Trade Mark Office was examining applications in the 52,000 range. In June 2014 the Trade Mark was examining applications in the 54,000 range. The Trade Mark Office is now examining applications in the 56,000 range.
Earlier posts on the progress of examination are here, here, here, and here.
Adjust your reminders accordingly, progress continues to be slow.
In September 2013 the Trade Mark Office was examining applications in the 52,000 range. In June 2014 the Trade Mark was examining applications in the 54,000 range. The Trade Mark Office is now examining applications in the 56,000 range.
Earlier posts on the progress of examination are here, here, here, and here.
Adjust your reminders accordingly, progress continues to be slow.
Wednesday, 19 August 2015
Qatar - Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances
News from WIPO (in July) that Qatar has acceded to the Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances. The notification (here) states:
Ratification by the State of Qatar
The Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) presents his compliments to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and has the honor to notify the deposit by the Government of the State of Qatar, on July 3, 2015, of its instrument of ratification of the Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances, adopted at Beijing on June 24, 2012.
The date of entry into force of the said Treaty will be notified when the required number of ratifications or accessions is reached in accordance with Article 26 of the said Treaty.
July 3, 2015
Ratification by the State of Qatar
The Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) presents his compliments to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and has the honor to notify the deposit by the Government of the State of Qatar, on July 3, 2015, of its instrument of ratification of the Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances, adopted at Beijing on June 24, 2012.
The date of entry into force of the said Treaty will be notified when the required number of ratifications or accessions is reached in accordance with Article 26 of the said Treaty.
July 3, 2015
Tunisia - New Amounts, in Swiss francs, of the Individual Fee under the Madrid Agreement and Protocol
News from WIPO that the individual fee for Tunisia has changed:
New Amounts, in Swiss francs, of the Individual Fee in Respect of Several Contracting Parties
In accordance with Rule 35(2)(d) of the Common Regulations under the Madrid Agreement and Protocol, the Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) shall establish new amounts, in Swiss francs, of an individual fee where, for more than three consecutive months, the official exchange rate of the United Nations between the Swiss franc and the currency used to express the amounts of that individual fee is lower than the last exchange rate applied by at least 10%.
As those conditions have been met, the Director General of WIPO has established new amounts, in Swiss francs, of the individual fee payable in respect of the following Contracting Parties:
Mexico, Tajikistan, Tunisia and Turkmenistan.
The new amounts will be applicable as from September 13, 2015.
For further information, please refer to Information Notices Nos. 31/2015 to 34/2015
New Amounts, in Swiss francs, of the Individual Fee in Respect of Several Contracting Parties
In accordance with Rule 35(2)(d) of the Common Regulations under the Madrid Agreement and Protocol, the Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) shall establish new amounts, in Swiss francs, of an individual fee where, for more than three consecutive months, the official exchange rate of the United Nations between the Swiss franc and the currency used to express the amounts of that individual fee is lower than the last exchange rate applied by at least 10%.
As those conditions have been met, the Director General of WIPO has established new amounts, in Swiss francs, of the individual fee payable in respect of the following Contracting Parties:
Mexico, Tajikistan, Tunisia and Turkmenistan.
The new amounts will be applicable as from September 13, 2015.
For further information, please refer to Information Notices Nos. 31/2015 to 34/2015
Algeria joins the Madrid Protocol
News from WIPO of the accession by the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria to the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks.
The first notice, dated 31 July 2015, is here.
A WIPO newsletter dated 11 August 2015 stated that:
Algeria Joins the Madrid Protocol
Algeria has acceded to the Madrid Protocol for the International Registration of Marks, transforming the Madrid System into a one treaty system.
On July 31, 2015, the Government of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria deposited with the Director General of WIPO its instrument of accession to the Madrid Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks. The Protocol will enter into force with respect to Algeria on October 31, 2015.
Signatory to the Madrid Agreement since July 5, 1972, the country was the last of the 95 members of the Madrid System which was not party the Protocol.
This represents a milestone for the Madrid System and its users. From now on, all international registrations of marks will be exclusively governed by the Madrid Protocol. As a result, the filing and management of international registrations will be simplified for users.
Brand owners in Algeria will also benefit from this accession, gaining full access to the territories covered by the Madrid Protocol for international trademark protection.
An information notice concerning this accession will be available shortly on the WIPO web site.
And then the full information notice No. 35/20158 dated 19 August 2015 is here.
This part of the Empty Quarter is delighted that Algeria has brought the countries in the Protocol and the Agreement in line.
The first notice, dated 31 July 2015, is here.
A WIPO newsletter dated 11 August 2015 stated that:
Algeria Joins the Madrid Protocol
Algeria has acceded to the Madrid Protocol for the International Registration of Marks, transforming the Madrid System into a one treaty system.
On July 31, 2015, the Government of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria deposited with the Director General of WIPO its instrument of accession to the Madrid Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks. The Protocol will enter into force with respect to Algeria on October 31, 2015.
Signatory to the Madrid Agreement since July 5, 1972, the country was the last of the 95 members of the Madrid System which was not party the Protocol.
This represents a milestone for the Madrid System and its users. From now on, all international registrations of marks will be exclusively governed by the Madrid Protocol. As a result, the filing and management of international registrations will be simplified for users.
Brand owners in Algeria will also benefit from this accession, gaining full access to the territories covered by the Madrid Protocol for international trademark protection.
An information notice concerning this accession will be available shortly on the WIPO web site.
And then the full information notice No. 35/20158 dated 19 August 2015 is here.
This part of the Empty Quarter is delighted that Algeria has brought the countries in the Protocol and the Agreement in line.
Wednesday, 29 July 2015
Saudi Customs seize 34 million counterfeit items in first half of 2015
This is the headline of the article which appears on the website of the Saudi Gazette today. The article can be read here.
Saudi Customs have been very active in screening incoming shipments for many years and regularly detain shipments of goods. But perhaps more interestingly the number of counterfeit items detained is less than the number of items detained on the basis that the do not meet the country's standards and specification - a huge 52 million items in the same 6 month period.
There is further coverage from good friends Saba & Co here.
Saudi Customs have been very active in screening incoming shipments for many years and regularly detain shipments of goods. But perhaps more interestingly the number of counterfeit items detained is less than the number of items detained on the basis that the do not meet the country's standards and specification - a huge 52 million items in the same 6 month period.
There is further coverage from good friends Saba & Co here.
Friday, 24 July 2015
WIPO - PCT country guides
This part of the Empty Quarter recently added some further newsletters to a subscription on the WIPO website as part of WIPO changing to a new WIPO e-newsletter platform. As a result this part of the Empty Quarter now knows about the WIPO PCT Applicant's Guide (here) which provides a very large amount of very useful information on Receiving Offices, International Searching Authorities, Supplementary Search, International Preliminary Examining Authorities, Deposits of Biological Material, and National Chapters on the National Phase.
There are entries for the UAE, Bahrain, Algeria, Egypt, Iran, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan (presumably North), Syria, and Tunisia.
The newsletter from WIPO reports that the National Chapter on Qatar has been updated.
UPDATE: A further newsletter from WIPO received today provides a link to the updated Annex C - Receiving Offices for Qatar which can be found here.
This part of the Empty Quarter has a firm belief that as much information as possible should be freely available to all and is delighted to see so much information being shared by WIPO.
There are entries for the UAE, Bahrain, Algeria, Egypt, Iran, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan (presumably North), Syria, and Tunisia.
The newsletter from WIPO reports that the National Chapter on Qatar has been updated.
UPDATE: A further newsletter from WIPO received today provides a link to the updated Annex C - Receiving Offices for Qatar which can be found here.
This part of the Empty Quarter has a firm belief that as much information as possible should be freely available to all and is delighted to see so much information being shared by WIPO.
Tuesday, 21 July 2015
Milestones (or a mill stone?)
This is the 200th post on this (very) occasional blog of news about IP in the Middle East and North Africa. In that time there have been over 15,000 page views and twice there have been more than 1,000 page views in a month. The average is about 4.5 posts per month (perhaps not enough).
Iran & Syria & Sanctions & Money
An interesting piece in the June 2015 Bulletin of good friends Saba & Co entitled "IRAN & SYRIA: LICENCE TO PROTECT YOUR IPR" dealing with whether payments to obtain intellectual property rights can be made to Syria or Iran. Fortunately, it appears they can.
UAE - Trade Mark Office - progress on applications filed in 2015
In mid-June 2015 the Trade Mark Office announced that it believed it had examined all applications filed between 1 January 2015 and 30 April 2015. If you have an application filed between those dates which has not been examined this part of the Empty Quarter suggests you follow up with the Trade Mark Office to find out where your acceptance or rejection has been sent.
Iran - WIPO domain name decision - marksandspencer.ir
News from WIPO (here) of the decision to order the transfer of the marksandspencer.ir domain from a local registrant to Marks and Spencer plc.
The local registrant did not respond in the proceedings. The full decision reads:
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Marks and Spencer Plc v. Ali Ebrahimi
Case No. DIR2015-0001
The local registrant did not respond in the proceedings. The full decision reads:
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Marks and Spencer Plc v. Ali Ebrahimi
Case No. DIR2015-0001
1. The Parties
Complainant is Marks and Spencer Plc of London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (“UK”), represented by FairWinds Partners, LLC, United States of America.
Respondent is Ali Ebrahimi of Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Complainant is Marks and Spencer Plc of London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (“UK”), represented by FairWinds Partners, LLC, United States of America.
Respondent is Ali Ebrahimi of Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with IRNIC.
The disputed domain name
3. Procedural History
The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on April 8, 2015. On April 9, 2015, the Center transmitted by email to IRNIC a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On April 11, 2015, IRNIC transmitted by email to the Center its verification response confirming that Respondent is listed as the registrant and providing the contact details. Hard copies of the Complaint were received by the Center on April 13, 2015.
The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the .ir Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “irDRP”), the Rules for .ir Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for .ir Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2(a) and 4(a), the Center formally notified Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceeding commenced on April 17, 2015. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a), the due date for Response was May 7, 2015. On May 8, 2015, the Center notified Respondent’s default.
The Center appointed Eduardo Machado as the sole panelist in this matter on May 15, 2015. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7.
The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on April 8, 2015. On April 9, 2015, the Center transmitted by email to IRNIC a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On April 11, 2015, IRNIC transmitted by email to the Center its verification response confirming that Respondent is listed as the registrant and providing the contact details. Hard copies of the Complaint were received by the Center on April 13, 2015.
The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the .ir Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “irDRP”), the Rules for .ir Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for .ir Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2(a) and 4(a), the Center formally notified Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceeding commenced on April 17, 2015. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a), the due date for Response was May 7, 2015. On May 8, 2015, the Center notified Respondent’s default.
The Center appointed Eduardo Machado as the sole panelist in this matter on May 15, 2015. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7.
4. Factual Background
Complainant is a UK corporation and is the owner of the trademark MARKS AND SPENCER, with trademark registration in many countries around the world, used in connection with the provision of retail store services offering such items as men’s and women’s apparel, furniture and home goods, food and wine, and many other products.
Complainant has extensively promoted the MARKS AND SPENCER trademark through global news outlets and a full range of media. Complainant is the owner of the domain name.
The disputed domain name was registered on November 29, 2014.
Complainant is a UK corporation and is the owner of the trademark MARKS AND SPENCER, with trademark registration in many countries around the world, used in connection with the provision of retail store services offering such items as men’s and women’s apparel, furniture and home goods, food and wine, and many other products.
Complainant has extensively promoted the MARKS AND SPENCER trademark through global news outlets and a full range of media. Complainant is the owner of the domain name
The disputed domain name was registered on November 29, 2014.
5. Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
Complainant argues that it is the owner of the distinctive and globally well-known MARKS AND SPENCER trademark, registered in many countries around the world, in use at least as early as 1884. Currently, Complainant has more than 1,200 locations in over 50 countries operating under the MARKS AND SPENCER trademark.
Complainant has been extensively promoting the trademark for over 100 years, through full range of media and owns the domain name. Consequently to the extensive usage and promotion of the trademark, Complaint argues that it has become famous and widely recognized throughout the world, including the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Complainant states that, apart from the country code Top-Level Domain (ccTLD) “.ir”, the disputed domain name is identical to Complainant’s registered MARKS AND SPENCER trademark. Complainant alleges that the use of a ccTLD is, at best, irrelevant to the irDRP test but, here, the “.ir” TLD actually enhances confusion by giving the false impression that Complainant maintains a retail store in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Complainant claims that Respondent attracts Internet users by using the MARKS AND SPENCER trademark, making the visitors think they are being linked to one of Complainant’s legitimate websites.
Complainant states that in an early decision involving the and domains, the UK High Court of Justice acknowledged that the MARKS AND SPENCER trademark is “well-known” and went on to hold that “[w]here the value of a name consists solely in its resemblance to the name or trade mark of another enterprise, the Court will normally assume that the public is likely to be deceived, for why else would the Defendants choose it?” Marks & Spencer PLC v. One in a Million, High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, November 28, 1997.
Complainant argues that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests to the disputed domain name. Complainant states that Respondent is not making a bona fide offering of goods and services. The disputed domain name resolves only to an “under construction” page. Complainant argues that the very fame of the MARKS AND SPENCER trademark casts serious doubt upon whether Respondent could make any legitimate use of the disputed domain name.
Complainant states that Respondent is not commonly known by the name Marks And Spencer nor does he operate a business or other organization under this mark or name and does not own any trademark or service mark rights in MARKS AND SPENCER.
Complainant argues that Respondent is not making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name without intent for commercial gain, but to confuse and mislead consumers, or to tarnish the world famous MARKS AND SPENCER trademark. Complainant states that this could lead visitors to think they are visiting a site of Complainant, until they discover the “under construction” message, which may lead to consumers believing Complainant has gone out of business or is not devoting attention to its online marketing or services. Either way, Complainant states that its trademark and commercial reputation are significantly harmed.
Complainant claims that Respondent used the trademark without consent from Complainant and was put on actual notice of Complainant’s rights through Complainant’s extensive use of the famous and distinctive MARKS AND SPENCER trademark, which long predates the creation of the disputed domain name.
Complainant states that Respondent has been merely passively holding the disputed domain name, which amounts to bad faith.
Complainant argues that it is the owner of the distinctive and globally well-known MARKS AND SPENCER trademark, registered in many countries around the world, in use at least as early as 1884. Currently, Complainant has more than 1,200 locations in over 50 countries operating under the MARKS AND SPENCER trademark.
Complainant has been extensively promoting the trademark for over 100 years, through full range of media and owns the
Complainant states that, apart from the country code Top-Level Domain (ccTLD) “.ir”, the disputed domain name is identical to Complainant’s registered MARKS AND SPENCER trademark. Complainant alleges that the use of a ccTLD is, at best, irrelevant to the irDRP test but, here, the “.ir” TLD actually enhances confusion by giving the false impression that Complainant maintains a retail store in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Complainant claims that Respondent attracts Internet users by using the MARKS AND SPENCER trademark, making the visitors think they are being linked to one of Complainant’s legitimate websites.
Complainant states that in an early decision involving the
Complainant argues that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests to the disputed domain name. Complainant states that Respondent is not making a bona fide offering of goods and services. The disputed domain name resolves only to an “under construction” page. Complainant argues that the very fame of the MARKS AND SPENCER trademark casts serious doubt upon whether Respondent could make any legitimate use of the disputed domain name.
Complainant states that Respondent is not commonly known by the name Marks And Spencer nor does he operate a business or other organization under this mark or name and does not own any trademark or service mark rights in MARKS AND SPENCER.
Complainant argues that Respondent is not making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name without intent for commercial gain, but to confuse and mislead consumers, or to tarnish the world famous MARKS AND SPENCER trademark. Complainant states that this could lead visitors to think they are visiting a site of Complainant, until they discover the “under construction” message, which may lead to consumers believing Complainant has gone out of business or is not devoting attention to its online marketing or services. Either way, Complainant states that its trademark and commercial reputation are significantly harmed.
Complainant claims that Respondent used the trademark without consent from Complainant and was put on actual notice of Complainant’s rights through Complainant’s extensive use of the famous and distinctive MARKS AND SPENCER trademark, which long predates the creation of the disputed domain name.
Complainant states that Respondent has been merely passively holding the disputed domain name, which amounts to bad faith.
B. Respondent
Respondent did not reply to Complainant’s contentions.
Respondent did not reply to Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
To succeed, Complainant must demonstrate that all of the elements listed in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy have been satisfied:
(i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and
(ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and
(iii) the disputed domain name has been registered or is being used in bad faith.
The burden of proving these elements is on Complainant.
To succeed, Complainant must demonstrate that all of the elements listed in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy have been satisfied:
(i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and
(ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and
(iii) the disputed domain name has been registered or is being used in bad faith.
The burden of proving these elements is on Complainant.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s MARKS AND SPENCER trademark, which was registered prior to the disputed domain name. The Panel finds that the mere presence of the ccTLD “.ir” is not enough to escape a finding of confusing similarity. In fact, such addition might even mislead consumers into the belief that the disputed domain name is Complainant’s domain name for the Islamic Republic of Iran consumers.
The Panel, therefore, finds that Complainant has established the first condition of the paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s MARKS AND SPENCER trademark, which was registered prior to the disputed domain name. The Panel finds that the mere presence of the ccTLD “.ir” is not enough to escape a finding of confusing similarity. In fact, such addition might even mislead consumers into the belief that the disputed domain name is Complainant’s domain name for the Islamic Republic of Iran consumers.
The Panel, therefore, finds that Complainant has established the first condition of the paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Complainant has alleged that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests with respect to the disputed domain name.
In this regard, the Panel finds that:
With respect to the paragraph 4(c)(i) of the Policy, there is no evidence that Respondent, before any notice of the dispute, used the disputed domain name or a name corresponding to the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services.
With respect to the paragraph 4(c)(ii) of the Policy, there is no evidence that indicates Respondent has ever been commonly known by the disputed domain name.
With respect to the paragraph 4(c)(iii) of the Policy, Respondent has not made or is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue.
In view of the above, the Panel concludes that Complainant has established the second condition of the paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
Complainant has alleged that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests with respect to the disputed domain name.
In this regard, the Panel finds that:
With respect to the paragraph 4(c)(i) of the Policy, there is no evidence that Respondent, before any notice of the dispute, used the disputed domain name or a name corresponding to the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services.
With respect to the paragraph 4(c)(ii) of the Policy, there is no evidence that indicates Respondent has ever been commonly known by the disputed domain name.
With respect to the paragraph 4(c)(iii) of the Policy, Respondent has not made or is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue.
In view of the above, the Panel concludes that Complainant has established the second condition of the paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
C. Registered or Used in Bad Faith
The Panel finds that Respondent has intentionally registered the disputed domain name, which reproduces Complainant’s MARKS AND SPENCER trademark. It is highly unlikely that Respondent did not acknowledge Complainant’s rights on the MARKS AND SPENCER trademark when the disputed domain name was registered.
The allegations of bad faith made by Complainant were not contested as Respondent did not reply to the Complaint. Examining the evidence provided by Complainant, it is confirmed that the trademark MARKS AND SPENCER has been in use long before the disputed domain name was registered, including in domain names highly similar to the disputed domain name. For such reasons, the Panel finds that Respondent must have been aware of Complainant’s trademark when it registered the disputed domain name.
There are no facts set out in the available record which could conceivably justify the registration of the disputed domain name by Respondent.
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name has been passively held by Respondent, as it is solely an “under construction” page.
In this sense, in Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmallows, WIPO Case No. D2000-0003, the panel found that bad faith use could be established where a respondent had been entirely inactive. Not all the grounds which supported a bad faith finding in that case are present in the facts as set out in the Complaint. However, the notoriety of Complainant’s mark, the failure by Respondent to provide any evidence of actual or contemplated good faith use of the disputed domain name and the fact that it is not possible to conceive of any active use of the disputed domain name which would amount to good faith use and/or would not infringe Complainant’s mark rights cumulatively support a finding by the Panel that Respondent is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.
Therefore, the Panel finds that Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith and that Complainant has established the third element of the paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
The Panel finds that Respondent has intentionally registered the disputed domain name, which reproduces Complainant’s MARKS AND SPENCER trademark. It is highly unlikely that Respondent did not acknowledge Complainant’s rights on the MARKS AND SPENCER trademark when the disputed domain name was registered.
The allegations of bad faith made by Complainant were not contested as Respondent did not reply to the Complaint. Examining the evidence provided by Complainant, it is confirmed that the trademark MARKS AND SPENCER has been in use long before the disputed domain name was registered, including in domain names highly similar to the disputed domain name. For such reasons, the Panel finds that Respondent must have been aware of Complainant’s trademark when it registered the disputed domain name.
There are no facts set out in the available record which could conceivably justify the registration of the disputed domain name by Respondent.
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name has been passively held by Respondent, as it is solely an “under construction” page.
In this sense, in Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmallows, WIPO Case No. D2000-0003, the panel found that bad faith use could be established where a respondent had been entirely inactive. Not all the grounds which supported a bad faith finding in that case are present in the facts as set out in the Complaint. However, the notoriety of Complainant’s mark, the failure by Respondent to provide any evidence of actual or contemplated good faith use of the disputed domain name and the fact that it is not possible to conceive of any active use of the disputed domain name which would amount to good faith use and/or would not infringe Complainant’s mark rights cumulatively support a finding by the Panel that Respondent is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.
Therefore, the Panel finds that Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith and that Complainant has established the third element of the paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
7. Decision
For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name be transferred to Complainant.
Eduardo Machado
Sole Panelist
Date: June 2, 2015
For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name
Eduardo Machado
Sole Panelist
Date: June 2, 2015
Morocco - WIPO domain name decision - bikhir.ma
News from WIPO (here) of the decision to order the transfer of the bikhir.ma domain from one local registrant to another.
The decision is in French.
The decision is in French.
Morocco - WIPO domain name decision - orange.ma
News from WIPO (here) of the decision to order the transfer of the orange.ma domain from a local registrant to Orange Brand Services Limited.
The decision is in French. At the time of writing the transfer has not yet taken place and the garden plant related services of the registrant can be seen on the website.
The decision is in French. At the time of writing the transfer has not yet taken place and the garden plant related services of the registrant can be seen on the website.
Thursday, 2 July 2015
Libya - Trade Mark Office update
Further to earlier posts here and here there is news from good friends Beit Al-Khebra Intellectual Property about the functioning of the Trade Mark Office in Libya.
They report that the Trade Mark Office, which has not printed any registration certificates since 2002, has recently started to print certificates again. This is good news for rights holders around the world and this part of the Empty Quarter hopes that certificates will start flowing out from all of the local agents to their clients soon.
Monday, 22 June 2015
Eid Al Fitr - Saudi Arabia
The new moon is likely to be visible in Saudi Arabia on the evening of Friday 17 July 2015.
News is beginning to reach this part of the Empty Quarter that the government in Saudi Arabia will close from 10 July 2015, so the last working day before Eid Al Fitr will be Thursday 9 July 2015, and reopen on Wednesday 22 July 2015.
News is beginning to reach this part of the Empty Quarter that the government in Saudi Arabia will close from 10 July 2015, so the last working day before Eid Al Fitr will be Thursday 9 July 2015, and reopen on Wednesday 22 July 2015.
Tuesday, 19 May 2015
Yemen - Judicial holiday
News today, from good friends SMAS, that the Courts are now on vacation until mid-July 2015, presumably re-opening after Eid Al Fitr. Only urgent cases are dealt with in the holiday.
Monday, 18 May 2015
UAE - Ministry of Economy fee increases with copies of the documents
Further to the earlier posts here, here, and here on the fee increases in the UAE following Cabinet Decree No. 9 of 2015, this part of the Empty Quarter has received a notification dated 13 May 2015 from the Administration of Industrial Property in the Ministry of Economy confirming that the Decree will come into effect on Saturday 30 May 2015 and attaching Financial Circular No. (15) of 2015 signed by the Under Secretary of Economic Affairs to that effect. Also attached is an official English translation of the Decree.
Copies of the various documents can be found here:
Copies of the various documents can be found here:
Monday, 11 May 2015
UAE - WCO and FCA organise an event on 20 May 2015
News from the Federal Customs Authority of an event organised in conjunction with the World Customs Organisation to take place at the Conrad Hotel in Dubai on 20 May 2015.
Day 1
Keynote Speech: FCA
First Session: UAE and IPR Legislation: Ministry of Economy, Federal Customs Authority, World Customs Organisation, Institute of Training and Judicial Studies
Second Session: Laws and Practices Regarding the Disposition of IPR Infringing Goods: TRIPS Agreement and UAE Law, Pharmaceutical Concerns Regarding Disposal of IPR Goods, International Customs Experience in IPR Goods Disposal
Third Session: Cooperation Between Customs and Private Sector in dealing with IPR: Dubai Customs,
Customs Experience Dealing with Private Sectors
Fourth Session: IPM Mobile: IPM Mobile, UAE Experience in IPM Mobile, Private Sector Experience in IPM
Fifth Session: Common and Specific IPR Issues: Electronics (MMF), Pharmaceutical (Pfizer), Automotive (Harley Davidson), Luxury Goods (Comité Colbert)
Day 2
First Session: Risk Management: WCO Approach on Risk Management; IPM Mobile Training;
Second Session: Tools to Target IPR Fraud—Private Sector Examples: Apple, Richemont, LV, Harley Davidson, Nike, Burberry, Nestlé, Pfizer, Bic.
This part of the Empty Quarter has attended many such events and hopes, as always, that there will be as much action as there is discussion. The sessions which catches the eye is the second session on day 1 on destruction. Many detained shipments of counterfeit product are alleged to have been exported rather than seized and destroyed in the UAE. This part of the Empty Quarter expects this session to be interesting.
Day 1
Keynote Speech: FCA
First Session: UAE and IPR Legislation: Ministry of Economy, Federal Customs Authority, World Customs Organisation, Institute of Training and Judicial Studies
Second Session: Laws and Practices Regarding the Disposition of IPR Infringing Goods: TRIPS Agreement and UAE Law, Pharmaceutical Concerns Regarding Disposal of IPR Goods, International Customs Experience in IPR Goods Disposal
Third Session: Cooperation Between Customs and Private Sector in dealing with IPR: Dubai Customs,
Customs Experience Dealing with Private Sectors
Fourth Session: IPM Mobile: IPM Mobile, UAE Experience in IPM Mobile, Private Sector Experience in IPM
Fifth Session: Common and Specific IPR Issues: Electronics (MMF), Pharmaceutical (Pfizer), Automotive (Harley Davidson), Luxury Goods (Comité Colbert)
Day 2
First Session: Risk Management: WCO Approach on Risk Management; IPM Mobile Training;
Second Session: Tools to Target IPR Fraud—Private Sector Examples: Apple, Richemont, LV, Harley Davidson, Nike, Burberry, Nestlé, Pfizer, Bic.
This part of the Empty Quarter has attended many such events and hopes, as always, that there will be as much action as there is discussion. The sessions which catches the eye is the second session on day 1 on destruction. Many detained shipments of counterfeit product are alleged to have been exported rather than seized and destroyed in the UAE. This part of the Empty Quarter expects this session to be interesting.
UAE - Trade Mark Office - announcements on fees and oppositions
Two announcements from the Trade Mark Office yesterday.
Further to the earlier post here reporting the sprint to complete all oppositions, the Trade Mark Office yesterday sent a request to all agents asking for a list of all pending opposed marks so they can complete the pending oppositions as soon as possible.
Further to the earlier posts here, and here, the Trade Mark Office has issued Administrative Circular 1 of 2015 confirming that the fees will be increased to those set out in Cabinet Decree 9 of 2015 with effect from 30 May 2015.
Further to the earlier post here reporting the sprint to complete all oppositions, the Trade Mark Office yesterday sent a request to all agents asking for a list of all pending opposed marks so they can complete the pending oppositions as soon as possible.
Further to the earlier posts here, and here, the Trade Mark Office has issued Administrative Circular 1 of 2015 confirming that the fees will be increased to those set out in Cabinet Decree 9 of 2015 with effect from 30 May 2015.
Saturday, 2 May 2015
South Sudan - an update on not much happening
News from good friends Spoor & Fisher in February 2015 here of what is, or is not, happening in South Sudan. For those who cant click through they say:
"South Sudan
South Sudan gained full independence from Sudan in 9 July 2011, which means that Sudanese trade mark registrations no longer have any effect in South Sudan. Unfortunately South Sudan has not passed its own trade mark legislation either which means, quite simply, that there is no trade mark law. Notwithstanding this, the Business Registry of South Sudan is accepting and processing trade mark applications, and it is being guided by the Sudan Trade Marks Act of 1969.
So what effect do these applications have? Although they have no official effect, the general feeling is that they will be recognised in the sense that a certificate issued under this system will be cited against a later application, and may possibly even be recognised in litigation. The received wisdom also is that any trade mark legislation that is eventually passed will ratify and recognise registrations that were granted under the informal system, and that they will run for ten years from the filing date. It is therefore worthwhile filing in South Sudan.
The filing process under the informal system is quite particular. Only single-class applications may be filed; it is necessary to submit a notarised Power of Attorney and a notarised Certificate of Incorporation or Extract from the Commercial Register; and it is also necessary to submit a representation of the mark and a picture or photo showing how the mark is to be applied to the goods claimed. In cases where the application covers beverages for human consumption, the picture requirement is replaced by one requiring real samples of the container containing the beverage and showing the trade mark to be submitted – this is apparently so that it can be tested for public health reasons.
At this stage there are no corresponding arrangements for patents, designs or other IP rights in South Sudan."
"South Sudan
South Sudan gained full independence from Sudan in 9 July 2011, which means that Sudanese trade mark registrations no longer have any effect in South Sudan. Unfortunately South Sudan has not passed its own trade mark legislation either which means, quite simply, that there is no trade mark law. Notwithstanding this, the Business Registry of South Sudan is accepting and processing trade mark applications, and it is being guided by the Sudan Trade Marks Act of 1969.
So what effect do these applications have? Although they have no official effect, the general feeling is that they will be recognised in the sense that a certificate issued under this system will be cited against a later application, and may possibly even be recognised in litigation. The received wisdom also is that any trade mark legislation that is eventually passed will ratify and recognise registrations that were granted under the informal system, and that they will run for ten years from the filing date. It is therefore worthwhile filing in South Sudan.
The filing process under the informal system is quite particular. Only single-class applications may be filed; it is necessary to submit a notarised Power of Attorney and a notarised Certificate of Incorporation or Extract from the Commercial Register; and it is also necessary to submit a representation of the mark and a picture or photo showing how the mark is to be applied to the goods claimed. In cases where the application covers beverages for human consumption, the picture requirement is replaced by one requiring real samples of the container containing the beverage and showing the trade mark to be submitted – this is apparently so that it can be tested for public health reasons.
At this stage there are no corresponding arrangements for patents, designs or other IP rights in South Sudan."
Libya - brief update on what is happening
Further to the earlier post here of news (from February 2015) from good friends Spoor & Fisher here is a very brief update from them. For those who cannot link through they say:
"Libya
Although the Patents Office and the Trade Marks Office both survived the war – with the Patents Office resuming normal operations in 2012 and the Trade Marks Office doing so in 2013 – recent unrest has resulted in the Trade Marks Office closing indefinitely. The Patents Office remains open as it is completely separate to the Trade Marks Office. The Patents Office is located at the Industrial Research Centre, which is run by government officials."
Although the Patents Office and the Trade Marks Office both survived the war – with the Patents Office resuming normal operations in 2012 and the Trade Marks Office doing so in 2013 – recent unrest has resulted in the Trade Marks Office closing indefinitely. The Patents Office remains open as it is completely separate to the Trade Marks Office. The Patents Office is located at the Industrial Research Centre, which is run by government officials."
Wednesday, 29 April 2015
Saudi Arabia - Patent Cooperation Treaty
News by email newsletter from good friends SMAS in March 2015 that the Saudi Patent Office is now acting as a recipient office for International PCT applications and that the Saudi Patent Office has started receiving National Phase applications under the PCT. SMAS report that the Saudi Patent Office has issued a formal notification that the Saudi Patent Office is accredited as a recipient office for International PCT applications from 1 February 2015. From the same date the Patent Office also started to receive national phase patent applications under the PCT scheme.
SMAS report that the requirements for filing a national phase patent applications are:
SMAS report that the requirements for filing a national phase patent applications are:
1. A Power of Attorney, legalised by the Saudi Consulate.
2. A Deed of Assignment from the inventor(s), legalised by the Saudi Consulate.
3. A copy of the PCT application as published.
4. A certified copy of the priority document, if not already included in the PCT application.
5. Specification, abstract, claims, and drawings.
2. A Deed of Assignment from the inventor(s), legalised by the Saudi Consulate.
3. A copy of the PCT application as published.
4. A certified copy of the priority document, if not already included in the PCT application.
5. Specification, abstract, claims, and drawings.
Egypt - conference on Conference on the Challenges Facing the Application of the Intellectual Property Laws in the Arab World
News from good friends SMAS of a conference held in to celebrate World Intellectual Property Day on the Challenges Facing the Application of the Intellectual Property Laws in the Arab World on 22nd and 23rd April 2015 at the headquarters of the General Secretariat of the League of Arab States in Cairo held under the supervision of Intellectual Property Management and Competitive Economic Sector - the General Secretariat of the Arab League in cooperation with SMAS Intellectual Property.
Lebanon - Powers of Attorney must be legalised
News from good friends Saba & Co. in their April 2015 newsletter (here) and good friends SMAS by email alert of announcement No. 15/2/A.T on 21 March 2015 that from 10 April 2015 all Powers of Attorney must be legalised for any transaction at the Intellectual Property Protection Department.
Qatar - patent fees payable
News from
good friends Saba & Co. in their April 2015 newsletter (here) that filing fees, substantive
examination fees, and accumulated annuities related to patent applications
filed before 12 January 2015 must be paid by 31 July 2015. For new patent
applications the second and third annuity fees must be paid.
Further news from good friends SMAS by email that the Qatari Patent Office has requested applicants to:
1. Pay the official filing fees of US$550.
2. Pay the official examination fees of US$1390.
3. Pay all accumulated annuity fees on pending application filed in 2012, and 2013. The base date of annuity fee is the filing date of International PCT application.
The official annuity fees will be calculated as follows:
Further news from good friends SMAS by email that the Qatari Patent Office has requested applicants to:
1. Pay the official filing fees of US$550.
2. Pay the official examination fees of US$1390.
3. Pay all accumulated annuity fees on pending application filed in 2012, and 2013. The base date of annuity fee is the filing date of International PCT application.
The official annuity fees will be calculated as follows:
Term Students Individuals Companies
and
2nd Year 28 55 110
3rd Year 28 70 140
4th Year 28 85 165
5th Year 28 100 195
6th Year 28 110 220
7th Year 28 125 250
8th Year 28 140 275
9th Year 28 155 305
10th Year 28 165 330
11th Year 28 180 360
12th Year 28 195 385
13th Year 28 210 415
14th Year 28 220 440
15th Year 28 235 470
16th Year 28 250 495
17th Year 28 261 522
18th Year 28 275 550
19th Year 28 275 550
20th Year 28 275 550
UAE - Trade Mark Office opposition sprint
A late update, that the Trade Mark Office is racing through many years of undecided oppositions. Hearings are called at very short notice (two days) and set for 30 minutes. Evidence can be submitted before or at the hearing. Decisions are issued within days of the hearing.
This part of the Empty Quarter is pleased to see the progress and hopes that the Trade Mark Office will complete all pending matters as quickly as sensibly possible.
This part of the Empty Quarter is pleased to see the progress and hopes that the Trade Mark Office will complete all pending matters as quickly as sensibly possible.
Syria - more news on legalisation of documents
Further to earlier posts here, here and here on issues with legalisation of documents destined for Syria this part of the Empty Quarter has news to share.
Recently, news reached this part of the Empty Quarter that:
The situation appears to change regularly and so this part of the Empty Quarter asks practitioners to share how they legalise documents for Syria so all rights holders can benefit.
- the Syrian Consulate in Australia is legalising documents
- the UAE Consulate in the United States of America has stopped legalising documents destined for Syria
- the Lebanese Consulate in the United States of America is now legalising documents destined for Syria
- despite rumours to the contrary the Syrian Consulates in Canada are closed and not legalising documents
The situation appears to change regularly and so this part of the Empty Quarter asks practitioners to share how they legalise documents for Syria so all rights holders can benefit.
UAE - Dubai - DCCI company searches
An update on the earlier post here that the Dubai Chamber of Commerce and Industry are again providing details of the shareholders in a business when providing a company profile. This is good news.
Tuesday, 28 April 2015
UAE - the new official fees from 29 May 2015
Further to the earlier post here this part of the Empty Quarter
now has a copy of Cabinet Decree 9/2015 dated 4 March 2015, published in
Official Gazette no. 577 dated 31 March 2015 (published on 21 April 2015) with
the full details of the significant increases to the official fees for many
transactions at the Ministry of Economy including trade marks, patents, designs
and copyrights.
The new fees apply from 29 May 2015. There are no
transitional provisions and so the new fees are expected to apply to all fees
payable from Sunday 31 May 2015. The new fees are:
|
Serial.
No.
|
Service
Description
|
Service
Fees
AED
|
|||
|
Copyrights
and Neighboring Rights Thereto
|
|||||
|
1
|
Collective Management
License.
|
100,000
|
|||
|
2
|
Annual Renewal of
Collective Management License.
|
50,000
|
|||
|
3
|
Collective Management
License In lieu of lost One.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
4
|
Workbook translation
License.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
5
|
Workbook translation
License In lieu of lost One.
|
500
|
|||
|
6
|
Workbook copying license.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
7
|
Workbook copying license
In lieu of lost One.
|
500
|
|||
|
8
|
Workbook translation and
copy license.
|
2,000
|
|||
|
9
|
Workbook translation and
copying license In lieu of lost One.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
10
|
Workbook Registration in
lieu of lost one.
|
300
|
|||
|
11
|
Workbook Registration for
natural person.
|
100
|
|||
|
12
|
Workbook Registration for
corporate person.
|
300
|
|||
|
13
|
Open file for
intellectual Workbook distributers
|
1,000
|
|||
|
14
|
Registration Application
of no more than (10) ten workbooks included in importation or distribution
contract, providing that a new application shall be submitted in case
of registering more workbooks.
|
500
|
|||
|
15
|
Filing Complaint for
violation of rights, for natural person.
|
150
|
|||
|
16
|
Filing Complaint for
violation of rights, for corporate person.
|
500
|
|||
|
17
|
Application for amending
data of any workbook.
|
200
|
|||
|
Commercial
Agencies
|
|||||
|
18
|
Recording a commercial
agency into the Commercial agencies register.
|
10,000
|
|||
|
19
|
Renewal of Registration
of commercial agency in The Commercial Agencies Register.
|
4,000
|
|||
|
20
|
Registration Certificate
of Commercial Agency in lieu of lost one
|
200
|
|||
|
21
|
True copy of a commercial
agency contract, or any other document kept in the Commercial Agents
Register.
|
100
|
|||
|
22
|
To Whom It May Concern
Certificate for Commercial agencies
|
200
|
|||
|
23
|
Circulation Application
for Customs, and other authorities with regard to commercial agencies.
|
200
|
|||
|
24
|
Official extract of
Registration Statement
|
200
|
|||
|
25
|
Application of
Certificate of Non Registration in Commercial Agent Register
|
200
|
|||
|
26
|
Application for recordal
in Commercial Agents Register
|
1,000
|
|||
|
27
|
inspection Application
for commercial agency infringement
|
2,000
|
|||
|
28
|
Application of additional
infringement inspection for commercial agency
|
1,000
|
|||
|
29
|
Current disputes between
principals and agents. To be collected from the commercial agent.
|
12,000
|
|||
|
30
|
Current disputes between
principals and agents. To be collected from the principal company.
|
12,000
|
|||
|
Trade
marks
|
|||||
|
31
|
Trade marks Journal Sale
|
100 for each copy
|
|||
|
32
|
Annual subscription in
Trade marks Journal
|
1,200
|
|||
|
33
|
Application by the trade
mark owner to record any amendment or addition to their trade mark.
|
500
|
|||
|
34
|
Application to amend the
use rules of registered trade mark assigned for control and inspection
procedures.
|
500
|
|||
|
35
|
Application for true copy
of what is recorded in trade marks register, or of any application or
document submitted to/ issued by Trade marks Department
|
200
|
|||
|
36
|
Trade mark Search
Application
|
500
|
|||
|
37
|
Application to record
mortgage on trade mark or related trade marks, or trade mark license or trade
mark transfer .
|
1,700
|
|||
|
38
|
Application to remove a
mortgage registered on a trade mark or related trade marks.
|
500
|
|||
|
39
|
Application to deregister
trade mark license.
|
500
|
|||
|
40
|
Application to deregister
as trade mark with regard to all goods, products or services, or any of them.
|
500
|
|||
|
41
|
Application for
registration of trade mark or group of trade marks related to goods, products
or services under any class.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
42
|
Application for
registration of trade mark or group of trade marks related to goods, products
or services under one class.
|
10,000
|
|||
|
43
|
Renewal of registration
of trade mark or group of trade marks related to goods, products or services
under one class.
|
10,000
|
|||
|
44
|
Application to register a
trade mark assigned for control and inspection procedures related to goods,
products or services under one class.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
45
|
Application to register a
trade mark assigned for control and inspection procedures related to goods,
products or services under another class.
|
10,000
|
|||
|
46
|
Renewal of registration
of a trade mark assigned for control and inspection procedures related to
goods, products or services under one class.
|
10,000
|
|||
|
47
|
Application for recording
of information into trade mark register by owner of the registered trade
mark.
|
500
|
|||
|
48
|
Application to renew the
protection period of registered trade mark, group of registered trade marks
or trade mark assigned for control and inspection procedures, if the
application is submitted during the last year of protection, and for each
trade mark of any group of trade marks subsequent to the first group of trade
mark.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
49
|
Application to renew
protection period of registered trade mark, group of registered trade marks
or trade mark assigned for control and inspection procedures, if the
application is submitted within three months after protection expiration, and
for each trade mark of any group of trade marks subsequent to the first group
of trade mark.
|
2,000
|
|||
|
50
|
Filing inspection
Application regarding trade mark infringement
|
2,000
|
|||
|
51
|
Appeal against rejection
of an application for registration of trade mark or subjecting the acceptance
of the same to a condition.
|
5,000
|
|||
|
52
|
Opposition to trade mark
registration
|
10,000
|
|||
|
53
|
Application for hearing
the statements of both parties, and any of them before considering objections
to a trade mark registration.
|
500
|
|||
|
54
|
Appeal against rejection
to make any addition or amendment to a registered trade mark.
|
2,500
|
|||
|
55
|
Application for temporary
protection for a trade mark in local or international exhibitions.
|
500
|
|||
|
56
|
Objection to application
for deregistration of trade mark license of use.
|
500
|
|||
|
57
|
Publication of trade mark
in trade marks journal
|
1,000
|
|||
|
58
|
Additional Inspection
Application regarding the same trade mark infringement complaint.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
59
|
Appeal against settlement
decision issued in opposition to trade mark registration.
|
10,000
|
|||
|
60
|
Amending registration
details of trade mark registration agent.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
61
|
Application for legal
grace period to submit the power of attorney of trade mark registration
application, or to submit opposition to a trade mark registration.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
62
|
Application for legal
grace period to submit the document related to a previous priority of trade
mark registration in a member country of Paris Convention.
|
500
|
|||
|
63
|
Application for legal
grace period to submit the priority document which was previously submitted
in a member country in Paris Conventions, to register trade mark after
expiration of three month from the date of filing the subsequent
application.
|
500
|
|||
|
64
|
Application for
reconsideration of technical examination decision issued with regard to a
trade mark registration.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
65
|
Issuance of trade mark
certificate in lieu of lost one.
|
200
|
|||
|
66
|
Application for
cancellation of trade mark.
|
10,000
|
|||
|
67
|
Registration of trade
mark registration agent, For sole establishment.
|
3,000
|
|||
|
68
|
Registration of trade
mark registration agent, For national company.
|
5,000
|
|||
|
69
|
Registration of trade
mark registration agent, For foreign company.
|
10,000
|
|||
|
Industrial
Projects
|
|||||
|
70
|
Issuance of Non
Compliance Certificate
|
500
|
|||
|
71
|
Issuance of value -Added
Certificate
|
1,000
|
|||
|
72
|
Update or amend data of
Industrial Register
|
250
|
|||
|
73
|
Issuance of Price
Preference Certificate
|
100
|
|||
|
74
|
Registration of
industrial project in Industrial Register for the first time.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
75
|
Renewal of registration
in Industrial Register.
|
500 annually
|
|||
|
76
|
Initial approval for
industrial project
|
1,000
|
|||
|
77
|
Renewal of initial
approval for industrial project
|
500
|
|||
|
78
|
Application to add one
raw material, or more, (introduction of raw material) to the list of raw
materials used in industrial production.
|
100 for each application
|
|||
|
79
|
Application to increase
quota of one raw material, or more, (introduction of raw material) in the
list of raw materials used in industrial production.
|
50 for each application
|
|||
|
80
|
Exportation of scrap iron
outside UAE
|
250 for one ton
|
|||
|
81
|
Industrial imports
exemption from Customs Fees
|
50 for each application
|
|||
|
82
|
Industrial inspection
|
100
|
|||
|
Auditors
|
|||||
|
83
|
Recordal of Change of any
amendment or change to the registration data or the documents attached thereto,
or on transfer of registration form one schedule to another , for national
companies.
|
400
|
|||
|
84
|
Recordal of Change of any
amendment or change to the registration data or the documents attached
thereto, or on transfer of registration form one schedule to another, for
foreign companies.
|
500
|
|||
|
85
|
Recordal of Change of any
amendment or change to the registration data or the documents attached
thereto, or on transfer of registration form one schedule to another, for
natural persons.
|
200
|
|||
|
86
|
Registration of Head
Office of national companies in auditor schedule, for two years.
|
10,000
|
|||
|
87
|
Renewal of national
companies Head Office Registration in Auditors Schedule.
|
5,000
|
|||
|
88
|
Registration of branches
of national companies in Auditors Schedule, for two years.
|
10,000 for each branch
|
|||
|
89
|
Renewal of national
companies branches Registration in Auditors Schedule.
|
5,000 for each branch
|
|||
|
90
|
Registration of foreign
companies in Auditors Schedule, for two years.
|
25,000 for each year
|
|||
|
91
|
Renewal of Registration
of foreign companies in Auditors Schedule.
|
10,000 for each branch
|
|||
|
92
|
Registration of natural
persons in Practicing Auditors Schedule, for two years.
|
3,000
|
|||
|
93
|
Renewal of natural
persons Registration in Practicing Auditors Schedule.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
94
|
Registration of natural persons
in Non Practicing Auditors Schedule, for two years.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
95
|
Renewal of natural
persons Registration in Non Practicing Auditors Schedule.
|
300
|
|||
|
96
|
Registration in Auditing
Trainees Schedule.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
97
|
Filing a complaint
against natural or corporate auditor.
|
5,000
|
|||
|
98
|
Inquiring about auditors.
|
200
|
|||
|
99
|
To Whom It May Concern
Certificate for auditors.
|
100
|
|||
|
100
|
Certificate of
registration or renewal of registration of auditors in lieu of lost or
damaged one.
|
100
|
|||
|
Industrial
Property of Patents
|
Natural
person
|
Corporate
person
|
|||
|
101
|
Filing Application for
search and technical examination for patents
|
7,000
|
|||
|
102
|
Filing Application for
amending search and technical examination for patents
|
5,000
|
|||
|
103
|
Publication of any
decision, judgment, contract, or procedures which is required to be paid
before publication according to Federal Law No 17 of 2002.
|
400
|
800
|
||
|
104
|
True copy of any document
of protection documents or other related documents, certificate of content of
any of them, or extract of its relative register.
|
100
|
200
|
||
|
105
|
Recordal in agent
registration schedule.
|
3,000
|
|||
|
106
|
Renewal of recordal in
agent registration schedule.
|
2,000
|
|||
|
107
|
Appeal before Appeal
Committee which is formed by virtue of Federal Law No 17 of 2002 on
regulation and protection of industrial property of patents, fees, and
industrial designs.
|
500
|
1,000
|
||
|
108
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 2nd year).
|
400
|
800
|
||
|
109
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 3rd year).
|
420
|
840
|
||
|
110
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 4th year).
|
440
|
880
|
||
|
111
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 5th year).
|
460
|
920
|
||
|
112
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 6th year).
|
480
|
960
|
||
|
113
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 7th year).
|
500
|
1,000
|
||
|
114
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 8th year).
|
520
|
1,040
|
||
|
115
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 9th year).
|
540
|
1,080
|
||
|
116
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 10th year).
|
560
|
1,120
|
||
|
117
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 11th year).
|
580
|
1,160
|
||
|
118
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 12th year).
|
600
|
1,200
|
||
|
119
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 13th year).
|
620
|
1,240
|
||
|
120
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 14th year).
|
640
|
1,280
|
||
|
121
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 15th year).
|
660
|
1,320
|
||
|
122
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 16th year).
|
680
|
1,360
|
||
|
123
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 17th year).
|
700
|
1,400
|
||
|
124
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 18th year).
|
720
|
1,440
|
||
|
125
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 19th year).
|
740
|
1,480
|
||
|
126
|
Annual Progressive Fees
for protection documents and applications related thereto, as of the second
year (Following the date of submission of the application), till expiration
of protection (for the 20th year).
|
760
|
1,520
|
||
|
127
|
Additional fees in case
of accepting payment of annual progressive fees within 30 days from
expiration of year of payment.
|
200
|
400
|
||
|
128
|
Registration of
protection application for industrial property of patents.
|
1000
|
2,000
|
||
|
129
|
Application for correcting
or amending data of protection document of industrial property for patents.
|
200
|
400
|
||
|
130
|
Renewal of period of
protection document of industrial property for drawings and industrial
designs.
|
1,000
|
2,000
|
||
|
131
|
Assignment registration
of protection document of industrial property for patents.
|
400
|
800
|
||
|
132
|
Application for
registration of Know-How or license contact.
|
200
|
400
|
||
|
133
|
Application to amend or
renew Know-How or license contact.
|
100
|
200
|
||
|
134
|
Annual subscription in
Industrial Property Journal
|
600
|
|||
|
135
|
Request for copy of
Industrial Property Journal
|
50
|
|||
|
136
|
Change of registration
agent
|
1,000
|
|||
|
137
|
Technical Search in
Industrial Property Department in the Ministry
|
1,000
|
|||
|
138
|
Inquiring about
application status
|
200
|
400
|
||
|
139
|
Transfer of patent
|
500
|
1,000
|
||
|
140
|
Restoration of
application after being cancelled/fortified
|
1,500
|
3,000
|
||
|
141
|
Application of temporary
protection for patents in local or international exhibitions.
|
500
|
2,000
|
||
|
Commercial
and Foreign Companies
|
|||||
|
142
|
Announcement of
incorporation of a joint stock company.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
143
|
Publishing official deeds
of joint stock companies and companies limited by shares.
|
20,000
|
|||
|
144
|
Publishing of amendment
of official deeds of joint stock companies.
|
2,000
|
|||
|
145
|
Publishing official deed
of limited liability company.
|
3,000
|
|||
|
146
|
Publishing official deed
of partnerships or limited partnership.
|
2,000
|
|||
|
147
|
Publishing any amendment
of official deeds for the commercial companies.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
148
|
Approval of microfilm
system for saving documents of joint stock company.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
149
|
Application for extract
of registration details for foreign companies.
|
100
|
|||
|
150
|
Application for a
certificate to whom it may concern for foreign companies.
|
100
|
|||
|
151
|
Application for inquiry
of person companies.
|
100
|
|||
|
152
|
Attestation of person
companies contract.
|
100
|
|||
|
153
|
Application for
estimation/ of in kind shares of joint stock company.
|
5,000
|
|||
|
154
|
Application for reduction
of joint stock company capital.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
155
|
Examination of estimating
the premium of joint stock company.
|
5,000
|
|||
|
156
|
Examination of
application for transfer into joint stock company.
|
2,000
|
|||
|
157
|
Registering a joint stock
company in company register.
|
10,000
|
|||
|
158
|
Renewal of registration
of a joint stock company register
|
5,000
|
|||
|
159
|
Sale, merge or
acquisition of foreign companies.
|
15,000
|
|||
|
160
|
Opening a branch of
person companies.
|
1,000
|
|||
|
161
|
Application for licensing
establishment of a branch or office of foreign company.
|
5,000
|
|||
|
162
|
Application for
registering a foreign company in foreign company register.
|
10,000
|
|||
|
163
|
Application for amending
details of foreign companies register.
|
2,000
|
|||
|
164
|
Renewal of registration
of foreign company in foreign companies register.
|
10,000
|
|||
|
165
|
Application for examining
incorporation of joint stock company.
|
5,000
|
|||
|
166
|
True copy of all
transactions.
|
100
|
|||
|
167
|
To whom it may concern
certificate for joint stock companies.
|
200
|
|||
|
Certificates of Origin
for National products
|
|||||
|
168
|
Certificate of origin for
national products, to be charged for invoices amounting from (AED 1 to AED
1000).
|
20
|
|||
|
169
|
Certificate of origin for
national products, to be charged for invoices amounting from (AED 1001 to AED
5000).
|
40
|
|||
|
170
|
Certificate of origin for
national products, to be charged for invoices amounting from (AED 5001 to AED
20000).
|
60
|
|||
|
171
|
Certificate of origin for
national products, to be charged for invoices amounting from (AED 20001 to
AED 40000).
|
80
|
|||
|
172
|
Certificate of origin for
national products, to be charged for invoices amounting from (AED 40001 to
AED 100000).
|
100
|
|||
|
173
|
Certificate of origin for
national products, to be charged for invoices amounting from (AED 100001 to
AED 500000).
|
200
|
|||
|
174
|
Certificate of origin for
national products, to be charged for invoices amounting exceeding (AED
500000).
|
400
|
|||
|
175
|
Printing an amended
certificate of origin in lieu of a certificate of origin, which fees have
been paid.
|
40
|
|||
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)