Divorce online service. Why should we lose money and time applying for divorce?

Written by James Wood


Continued from page 1

The high cost of lawyers has not forced people to refuse divorce. The deep reasons for divorce lie inrepparttar emotional - sensual sphere. The most painful and unpleasant situation is dialogue with a third party hired to engage in and bear your personal problems in general divorce discussion.

A company like LegalHelper.net that supplies online documents for divorce disagrees withrepparttar 119295 opinion of opponents that cheap divorce can minimizerepparttar 119296 importance of divorce. It is true thatrepparttar 119297 divorce will cost them only $249 but this will not pushrepparttar 119298 majority of people to end less-considered marriages faster and more often. Similarly,repparttar 119299 high cost of lawyers has not forced people to refuse divorce. The deep reasons for divorce lie inrepparttar 119300 emotional - sensual sphere. The most painful and unpleasant situation is dialogue with a third party hired to engage in and bear your personal problems in general discussion.

James Wood is a free-lance writer on family issues; his main goal is to help people during their complicated period of life in regards to divorce and separation.

Website: http://www.legalhelper.net/divorce.aspx


Trademark opposition practice

Written by Ludmila M. Serova


Continued from page 1

Another example of successful enforcement of trademark owner rights is cancellation of Cyrillic trademark registration РАМКА (in English -RAMKA) inrepparttar name of"Tandem " (Saint-Petersburg, Russia) for "butter and food fats " and other goods.

Said registration was opposed by Unilever N.V., one ofrepparttar 119294 largest producers of butter and food fats,repparttar 119295 owner of several registrations for RAMA, who had been spending large budget to advertise their trademark for several years and are still spending money for advertising ofrepparttar 119296 products under mark RAMA. The products marked by RAMA are well known to Russian consumers. The Russian company decided to get a benefit from such popularity, filed an application for a Cyrillic trademark of PAMKA and obtain edits registration. Non-Russian consumers do not see how much similarrepparttar 119297 Cyrillic words PAMA (in English RAMA) and PAMKA (in English RAMKA) are, and they need additional explanation. But first of all we should mention that Unilever N.V. who has been successfully marketing their products onrepparttar 119298 Russian market for many years, has not forgotten to register their mark in Cyrillic. Though many foreign companies neglect our advice and do not register Cyrillic versions of their trademarks. Anyway, Unilever N.V. got a registration for Cyrillic version of their trademark RAMA, namely, PAMA (in Cyrillic).

The word of RAMKA in Russian is a diminutive for RAMA and means a frame of smaller size. Thusrepparttar 119299 Cyrillic words in question of PAMKA and PAMA are similar against phonetic, semantic and visual criteria. While comparingrepparttar 119300 word of RAMA with Cyrillic PAMA, one could notice only phonetic similarity, but Cyrillic PAMA and Cyrillic PAMKA are similar also semantically and visually. The Board of Appeals acceptedrepparttar 119301 arguments provided by GORODISSKY &PARTNERS and canceledrepparttar 119302 registration ofrepparttar 119303 Russian company.

One more example is our opposition torepparttar 119304 registration of SCANDY trademark.

The trademark of SCANDY was registered inrepparttar 119305 name of one Russian company with respect to such goods as "stainless kitchen sinks "in Class 6 and "sanitary technical equipment for bathrooms, sinks for kitchen "in Class 11.

Said registration was opposed by our client CANDY S.p.A.,repparttar 119306 Italian manufacturer of popular sanitary equipment andrepparttar 119307 owner ofrepparttar 119308 well-known trademark CANDY in Russia.

Our opposition mentioned thatrepparttar 119309 opposed trademark was confusingly similar torepparttar 119310 trademark of CANDY earlier registered inrepparttar 119311 name of CANDY S.p.A. for similar goods, and thereforerepparttar 119312 opposed registration was granted in violation of Article 7(1)ofrepparttar 119313 Russian Trademark Law. Trademark attorneys of GORODISSKY &PARTNERS provided comparative analysis against phonetic and visual criteria, and concluded thatrepparttar 119314 marks were confusingly similar. The Board of Appeals accepted their arguments and canceled registration for SCANDY ofrepparttar 119315 Russian company.

It should be mentioned that in this caserepparttar 119316 Russian company tried to appealrepparttar 119317 Decision ofrepparttar 119318 Board of Appeals atrepparttar 119319 Higher Patent Chamber ofrepparttar 119320 Russian PTO but failed.



Russian trademark attorney Law firm: "Gorodissky & Partners" Russian Patent/Trademark Attorneys

From 1982 till 1994 worked as an examiner in the Russian Patent Office. From 1994 till 1998 worked in major IP firmes. In 1998 joined "Gorodissky & Partners". Deals with trademarks, namely, trademark proceedings and enforcement of trademark owners' rights. In 1999 participated at MARQUES International Conference, Drezden (Germany).


    <Back to Page 1
 
ImproveHomeLife.com © 2005
Terms of Use