IPTango: IMPI

Showing posts with label IMPI. Show all posts

Sunday, 6 February 2022

Tequila: finaliza la investigación bajo el Reglamento sobre obstáculos al comercio (TBR) de la UE

Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo February 06, 2022 No comments:

El 3 de febrero de 2022, la Comisión Europea anunció que finalizó formalmente su investigación sobre la denuncia referente a obstáculos al comercio en el sentido del Reglamento (UE) 2015/1843 (Reglamento sobre obstáculos al comercio, TBR en inglés) aplicados por México y consistentes en medidas que afectan la importación del Tequila. Consulta el anuncio aquí.

La denuncia

La denuncia había sido presentada por la Asociación de Cerveceros de Europa (The Brewers of Europe) debido a la decisión del Consejo Regulador del Tequila (CRT) de “ya no [conceder] certificados de exportación a … [TdS, una empresa] que produce y exporta «Tequila» … [a una] filial de Heineken NV … [debido a que] la cerveza Desperados de Heineken (una cerveza con aroma de «Tequila» añadido) infringe la [Norma Oficial Mexicana] aplicable a la utilización de la Indicación Geográfica (IG)” Tequila.

Durante la primera etapa de la investigación de la Comisión, intervinieron 22 partes interesadas, “en su mayoría representantes de asociaciones velando por la protección de las indicaciones geográficas europeas”. En efecto, oriGIn solicitó a la Comisión el reconocimiento como parte interesada considerando las implicaciones de la disputa en cuanto a los principios de las IG.

De igual manera, el procedimiento de examen también fue discutido por el Parlamento Europeo (lea aquí la pregunta parlamentaria planteada a la Comisión Europa, y consulte aquí la respuesta, ambas en inglés).

En mayo de 2021, la Comisión Europea finalizó el procedimiento de examen de la medida aplicada por México que afecta las exportaciones del Tequila a la UE (consulta el reporte aquí). Se concluyó “que si bien la medida plantea preocupaciones sobre el cumplimiento de México respecto de las normas de la OMC, específicamente la prohibición de restricciones a la exportación, está sujeta a una serie de procedimientos administrativos pendientes que pueden conducir a la revocación o modificación de la medida. Por lo tanto, la Comisión continuará monitoreando el resultado de los distintos procedimientos y, dependiendo de su resultado, podrá reevaluar las acciones a emprender” (énfasis añadido).

En octubre de 2021, la Asociación de Cerveceros de Europa informó a la Comisión Europea que “la empresa de la UE afectada había encontrado una solución con las autoridades mexicanas, lo que permitió la eliminación de los supuestos obstáculos al comercio”. En consecuencia, retiraron la denuncia.

*El 7 de febrero de 2022, se publicó en el Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea, la Decisión de Ejecución (UE) 2022/161 de la Comisión de 3 de febrero de 2022 por la que se da por concluido el procedimiento de examen relativo a los obstáculos al comercio, en el sentido del Reglamento (UE) 2015/1843, aplicados por los Estados Unidos Mexicanos y consistentes en medidas que afectan a la importación de Tequila. Consulta aquí la Decisión de Ejecución.

El retiro de la denuncia y la finalización de la investigación por parte de la Comisión Europea suceden al acuerdo amistoso entre CRT y Heineken, luego de que CRT iniciara varias acciones legales en la Unión Europea que involucraban el uso de la palabra Tequila en la cerveza Desperados. Consulta aquí mi reporte sobre el acuerdo amistoso al que llegaron las partes.

Créditos:

La imagen es cortesía de Dante Gbn.

*Artículo actualizado el 7 de febrero de 2022.

CRT y Heineken ponen fin amistosamente a la disputa por el uso de la palabra “Tequila” en la cerveza Desperados

Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo July 16, 2021 No comments:

CRT (el Consejo Regulador del Tequila) anunció que la disputa legal por el uso de la palabra Tequila en la cerveza Desperados ha terminado.

En un video difundido el 13 de julio de 2021, Miguel Ángel Domínguez Morales (presidente del Consejo Regulador del Tequila) indicó que se ha llegado a un acuerdo amistoso con Heineken luego de que CRT iniciara varias acciones legales en la Unión Europea que involucraban el uso de la palabra Tequila en la cerveza Desperados.

Aunque los términos permanecen confidenciales, Miguel destacó que el acuerdo es beneficioso para ambas partes y que el Tequila continúa fuertemente protegido en la Unión Europea [su segundo mercado de exportación más grande después de Estados Unidos].

De acuerdo al comunicado de prensa, anualmente se exportan alrededor de 20 millones de litros a la Unión Europea, donde se encuentran disponibles más de 50 marcas de tequila*.

El Tequila está protegido en la Unión Europea de conformidad con el Acuerdo entre México y la Comunidad Europea sobre el reconocimiento mutuo y la protección de las denominaciones en el sector de las bebidas espirituosas de 1997, modificado en 2004 y 2020.

México: Premio IMPI a la invención mexicana 2021

IPTango March 03, 2021 No comments:

El Instituto Mexicano de la Propiedad Industrial (IMPI) publicó la convocatoria del Premio IMPI a la invención mexicana 2021.

Podrán participar en la convocatoria personas de nacionalidad mexicana dedicadas a la invención (sin afiliación) o que pertenezcan a una institución pública o privada de educación media superior o superior; centro de investigación; o micro, pequeña y mediana empresa ubicada en México.

Asimismo, los participantes deberán contar con un título de patente, modelo de utilidad o diseño industrial, otorgado de enero de 2019 a 2021 o con una solicitud de patente, modelo de utilidad o diseño industrial presentada ante el IMPI a la que se le haya notificado que procede su otorgamiento (oficio de cita a pago).

Se otorgará un premio en cada una de las siguientes categorías:

Patente
Modelo de utilidad
Diseño industrial
Innovación para micro, pequeñas y medianas empresas (patente, modelo de utilidad o diseño industrial)

Los premios serán entregados en el marco de día mundial de la propiedad intelectual. La fecha límite para participar es el 19 de marzo de 2021.

Las bases de la convocatoria pueden consultarse aquí.

Fuente: sitio web del IMPI, consultado el 3 de marzo de 2021.

Imagen de Gerd Altmann en Pixabay.

Mexico: the USPTO and IMPI launched the Parallel Patent Grant (PPG) initiative

IPTango December 26, 2020 No comments:

On 7 December 2020, the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (IMPI) and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced the launch of the Parallel Patent Grant (PPG) initiative.

According to the press releases, the PPG results from the Memorandum of Understanding on Technical and Strategic Collaboration (MoU) signed by the USPTO and IMPI on 28 January 2020.

In accordance with the MoU, the two Offices would “implement a parallel patent grant framework that allows IMPI to leverage USPTO search and examination results when granting a counterpart Mexican patent”.

Thus, under the PPG, “IMPI will expedite the grant of a Mexican patent for businesses and individuals already granted a corresponding U.S. patent”. This worksharing arrangement will make “faster for U.S. patent holders to obtain corresponding patents in Mexico”.

As stated by IMPI, approximately 11,000 patent applications filed between 2015 and 2018 may benefit from the PPG.

The PPG is not the first worksharing collaboration between IMPI and the USPTO, given the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) program has been implemented since 2011.

Sources: press releases issued by the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property and the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Credit: Image by Guy Dugas from Pixabay.

Reminder: today is the deadline to submit your application for the National Patent Drafting Workshop

Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo August 13, 2020 No comments:

As it was announced here, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (IMPI) will hold the National Patent Drafting Workshop from 17 to 21 August 2020.

The online workshop is addressed to researchers and academics of universities, technology transfer and research centres.

The course aims to foster innovation by improving the skills of patent applicants. The free workshop is limited to 80 participants.

Today is the deadline to submit your application here. Likewise, the universities or centres must send an email to impi.eventos5@impi.gob.mx to endorse the submissions.

More information here.

Image of Gerd Altmann on Pixabay.

The first non-traditional trademark registrations have been granted in Mexico

Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo May 03, 2019 No comments:

This post was first published on The IPKat blog:

The Mexican Industrial Property Law was significantly amended last year through two batches of amendments. Read this Kat's reviews on the first batch here and the second one here and here.

The second batch of amendments to the Law entered into force on 10 August 2018 and modified a number of provisions related to trademarks. One such amendment provides that trade dress, scents, sounds, holograms, the combination of colors and certification marks are entitled to trademark protection under Mexican IP Law.

Universities, Patents and Intellectual Property: do they match?

Patricia Covarrubia October 30, 2018 No comments:

The Director of the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (IMPI) reports that the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), in Mexico City, is the Higher Education establishment that has filed the most patent applications during the period 2013-2018 (278 of them). Therefore, this month IMPI and UNAM signed a collaboration agreement on industrial property.
According to IMPI’s director, IMPI and UNAM share the same ‘commitment to support and promote entrepreneurship and the creation of innovation, as well as the promotion of the predominant role of industrial property, endorsing the protection and commercialization of intangibles.’

In the same line, IMPI notes that since 2012 has increased the Patent Centres (CePats) from 21 to 104. These centres, linked to IMPI, are entities that rise in the research and higher education institutions. They provide consultancies, updates, training in the field of technological information searches, patents, industrial designs, utility models and everything related to the protection of industrial property.

An interesting fact published by IMPI is the data regarding the number of patent applications filed by national Higher Education institutions which, added together, are 1,205 patent applications:

UNAM, 'the people to the university, the university to the people'
by David Alfaro Siqueiros

The UNAM, 278;
the Instituto Politécnico Nacional (IPN), 222;
the Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, 164;
the Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, 140;
the Instituto Tecnológico de Monterrey (ITESM), 89;
the Secretaria de Educacion Publica-Technological National Education of Mexico, 81;
the Universidad de Guanajuato, 66;
the Universidad de Sonora, 64;
the Universidad Autonoma de Querétaro, 56; and
the Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana, 45.

Looking at this cooperation we can finally say that the academia and IP are counterparts, working together towards promoting innovation.

Mexican GIs and the registry of foreign GIs and AOs

Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo June 13, 2018 No comments:

This post was first published on The IPKat blog:

Recently, the Mexican Industrial Property Law was significantly amended and on 27 April 2018, the first batch of amendments to the Law entered into force. These amendments modified provisions regarding patents, designs, utility models, trademarks and appellations of origin (AOs). Moreover, for the first time, geographical indications (GIs) are regulated under the Mexican Industrial Property Law and a registry of foreign GIs and AOs lodged the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property will be created.

In this post, this Kat summarizes the amendments that came into force on 27 April 2018, particularly with respect to GIs and AOs. More details about the amendments to the provisions related to industrial designs, patents, and utility models, as previously discussed by Kat friends, can be seen here.

A post by this Kat regarding the second batch of amendments, which will enter into force on 10 August 2018 and were published on 18 May 2018 in the Federal Official Gazette (DOF), will follow!

Patent Support Program: Arriva Mexico!

Patricia Covarrubia February 27, 2018 No comments:

In developing an IP culture, Mexico is launching a ‘support program’. The idea is to assist inventors whose inventions may be capable of IP protection. To do so, the national IP office, IMPI, has united forces with the Mexico-United States Foundation for Science (FUMEC) and Nacional Financiera (NAFIN).

In general, it is highly noted that IP protection may contribute to the commercial activity in Mexico as well as its competitiveness in the collaboration with other countries. Therefore, the aim is to increase the number of patent applications and utility models and thus, adding value to the knowledge of inventors and entrepreneurs in Mexico.

Diving in (Mexico great sport)...to the project...yas!

With immediate effect the 2018 Call for he Patent Support Program is open (and valid until October this year).

What is this project about?
According to IMPI, the support offered ‘consists in providing specialized and free advice to Mexican developers’. It is directed at ‘entrepreneurs, independent inventors, researchers and entrepreneurs in the country, in order to provide them with tools for the protection of their inventions, their use and exploitation exclusively according to the Mexican legal framework.’

How does it work?
The services offered are:
• patentability analysis: examining the state of the art,
• advice regarding the writing of the application,
• delivery of workshops, among others.

It is open to the vast majority of sectors including IT, health, agriculture, environment, energy, to name a few.

Sources here and here.

SPORTFLIX, the Netflix of Sports, is suspended for an alleged violation of IPRs

Rodrigo Ramirez Herrera @ramahr September 06, 2017 No comments:

In the same way that Netflix changed the way of watching tv and films, Sportflix, a Mexican company with international partners, was intended to be a platform to provide sports events. Its launch was announced on 30^th August last. However, it was suspended on the 29^th by the Mexican Industrial Property Institute (IMPI).

On its website, the IMPI explains that following a complaint submitted through its piracy mailbox, the portal Sportflix.net was revised. After that, evidence of a possible violation of the Federal Copyright Law and the Mexican Industrial Property Law was found. This, because the content of the web apparently infringes some of the IPRs of the companies with the broadcasting rights to transmit the sports events found in the Sportflix web site, such as Televisa, TV Azteca, Fox Sports, ESPN, and Univisión.

As a consequence, a provisional measure consisting in suspending the launching of Sportflix was imposed, and a verification visit was communicated. Nonetheless, the verification visit scheduled for August 29^th could not be completed because the company´s staff opposed to it.

During an interview with the newspaper El Financiero, Carlos Martínez, the president of Fox Networks Group Latin America, expressed that Fox Sports and other sports content suppliers are waiting for the results of the investigation under development before issuing a complaint about the infraction of their IPRs.

For now, organisations such as the F1, the Fórmula E, the Mexican Football League, and the Champions League confirmed that they have no agreement with Sportflix for the broadcasting rights of the sports contents found on its portal. For its part, Sportflix announces on its web site that ‘before to provide a service in exchange for a subscription, the platform must go through the needed processes, so as to give sports streaming of the best quality.’ It is also affirmed that ‘the pre-register continues to be open’ after which a coupon will be received via email for a free day of access to the platform and the right to be ‘the first to know the date in which the service will be enabled.’

As it can be observed, in this case, the interests of the ‘traditional’ and the ‘new’ way to communicate tv shows, films and sports events to the public are combined. For this reason, it is relevant to know how this will end.

Post written by Florelia Vallejo Trujillo

New Geographical Indications on the Sight

Patricia Covarrubia August 08, 2017 No comments:

From various jurisdictions we received some Geographical Indication news:

Mexico: The Mexican Industrial Property Institute (IMPI) informed that under International Register No. 1062, published in the Bulletin ‘Appellations of Origin’ No. 45, the WIPO has granted international protection for the Mexican ‘Cacao Grijalva.’ This cacao has been protected as denomination of origin in Mexico since August 2016.

For its part, the diary El Economista reported that the National Association of Designations of Origin (ANDO) of Mexico is seeking legal protection for the red octopus ‘Pulpo Maya,’ as well as international recognition for the appellation of origin ‘Arroz Morelos.’

Chile: Lst Friday was inaugurated the ‘First Festival of the Longaniza’ in Chillán, Chile. According to the Regional Diary EDÑUBLE, this is one of many actions developed in the search for an appellation of origin to present this product to the world. Before the festival, local producers of 'longaniza' participated in a talk on geographical indications, featuring speakers from the INAPI. As reported by this news agency, at this stage, 20 local producers of longaniza have received the first general outlines to obtain the geographical indication ‘longaniza de Chillán.’

Post written by Florelia Vallejo Trujillo

Assistant Professor, Universidad del Tolima, Colombia
PhD Candidate University of Nottingham, UK

Patent Prosecution Highway: The Justice ‘Speedy’ League

Patricia Covarrubia July 24, 2017 No comments:

This month Colombia joined the network of the Global Patent Prosecution Highway (GPPH). This network has 22 members from Europe, North America, Asia, Oceania, and now Latin America. From that side of the pond United States and Canada are members [full list of members can be found here].

Patent applicants who have obtained protection in Colombia may request that the same application be reviewed in any of the other members that are part of the GPPH. This global pilot was launched back in January 2014 allowing ‘patent applicants to request accelerated examination at any of the offices involved in the pilot if their claims have been found to be acceptable by any of the other offices involved in the pilot’.

Upon the advantages published by the Superintendencia de Industria y Comercio (SIC) are:

Offices involved in this type of agreement are recognized as their ‘peers’: this is so because they have a harmonious patent law (patentable subject matter, substantive and procedural law are similar).
Rely on quality systems that guarantee the Seriousness of its acts (ISO 9001).
For applicants there is a greater chance that the patent will be approved because it has already been approved under same procedures and techniques; and the procedure is run in less time and there would be less transaction costs.

Latin America is part of some PPH. For instance Mexico has a PPH with the European Patent Office (the only office in Latin America to have such agreement with the EPO), with Japan (JPO) and has another one with the USPTO. The National offices of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay have also launched a PPH pilot program among themselves (these countries are members of PROSUR). Brazil has one with Chile, and another one with the USPTO. Peru and Spain do have a PPH in place.

While superman is not involved, the league still flies!

Source SIC.

It is all about opportunities: opposing to trade marks in Mexico

Patricia Covarrubia January 16, 2017 No comments:

From José Luis Alvarez, Mexican Trademark Agent at Mexican Consulting & Development, SC, the blog received a newsletter about the (no so) recent updates in Mexico.

Back in August 2016, the blog reported that at the end of the said month Mexico was to implement an opposition system in trade mark – the amendment to the law dated April, 2016. At that time, Mexico was one of the few countries which did not provide for trade mark opposition proceedings.

The Instituto Mexicano de la Propiedad Industrial (IMPI) is the administrative authority legally authorized to conduct ex officio examinations of trade mark applications on absolute and relative grounds. In any case, Mexico was not bound to introduce opposition proceedings as a result of its accession to the Madrid System. However, the amendment would make the trade mark system more efficient and harmonizing trade mark system “with global trends and benefiting its users.”

The opposition proceeding while known and practiced in many jurisdictions, it's sometimes not clear what it really entails. Therefore, Jose Luis reports the following ‘good to know’ guidance:

“The amendment included in order to grant the opportunity to anyone who considers that an application violates the IPL´s provisions, to file an opposition within one month of the date of its publication in the Gazette. No extension of the one month opposition period is allowed. After that one month opposition period expires, a list of those applications that were opposed will be published in the Gazette within the following 10 business days.
It is important to mention that the opposition system has no binding effect on the Mexican Trademark Office’s (IMPI) conduct of the registration process and, in particular:
The opposition will not result in any suspension of the registration process;
Opposing an application does not grant the opposing party any status as an interested third party;
The opposition shall not automatically determine the outcome of the in-depth examination carried out by the IMPI; and
The IMPI may consider, in its analysis, the opposition and statements made in response by the applicant.”

And while we are in the topic of trade marks, The Nice Classification - the international classification of goods and services applied for the registration of marks, is now in its eleventh edition - entered into force on January 1, 2017.

Innovation & health

Patricia Covarrubia September 27, 2016 No comments:

From Félix Rozanski, Director Ejecutivo del Centro de Estudios para el Desarrollo de la Industria Químico Farmacéutica Argentina, we heard that the 7th LATIN-AMERICAN SEMINAR ON: “INNOVATION AND HEALTH” took place last 21-23 September 2016. The event took place at two venues: the Federal Court of Administrative Justice in Mexico City and the Mexican Industrial Property Institute (IMPI).

Image result for medicines biosimilar cartoons

Not only the agenda has to be praised but the quality of the speakers is to be commended. The agenda cover topics such as: Challenges to Promote Innovation and Development in Latin America; Biomedicines: Regulations and access in Latin America; Correct Identification of ‘Biosimilar’; Data Exclusivity; the Linkage between Patents and Health.

Debates and experiences were heard from Judges and lawyers in the handling of technical and controversial cases; Voluntary vs. Compulsory licenses; Medicine Counterfeiting; and the experts from different National Industrial Property Institutes were also engaged in discussions and revealing the experiences and strategic plans in Latin America. Speakers such as Félix Rozanski (Argentina); Sergio Rodríguez Soria (Director Innovation at Production Ministry, Peru); Elke Simon (Patent Division, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Germany); David R. Gerk: Patent Prosecution Highway (USPTO); Albert Keyack (EPO); Freddy Arias Mora (Costa Rica), Professor School of Pharmacy and Patent Judicial Expert; Laura M. Vargas Sanchez (Director, Regulation of Health Products in Costa Rica); Corey Salsberg (NOVARTIS, Switzerland); Eladio Torres Moreno (Pfizer, USA); Francisco Gomez, (Sanofi, México); Luz María Anaya Domínguez (Judge, Specialized I.P. Chamber Administrative Federal Court, Mexico); Ramon Ignacio Cabrera Leon (Judge, Administrative Federal Court, Mexico); Francisco de las Carreras (Judge, Federal Civil and Commercial Second Instance Court, Argentina); Marcia Flores (Judge in the Quito Court of Justice, Ecuador); Jaime Enriquez ( Judge, Administrative Litigations Court, Ecuador); Rubí Lucrecia Gamboa Barrera de Valvert (Judge, First Instance Civil Court, Guatemala); Mónica Rosell (Expert in the Andean Community Court of Justice); Eric Velasco (Panama’s Supreme Court); Lic. Matías Schweizer (INPI, Argentina); Claudia Baez and Belen Cubilla (Patent Office, Paraguay); Nubia Chedid (INPI, Brazil); as many other judges, officials, and experts.

According to Félix Rozanski the most debated issues were:

(a) How to attract private investments to R&D? How to promote cooperation? How to develop regional R&D projects - mainly in the Pacific Alliance?
(b) The international cooperation and the new agreement signed to speed up patent examinations;
(c) The decision making process in the difficult IP litigation with contrasting views between Chilean and Argentine judges as to the role of the judge;
(d) The value of incremental innovations for the national industries and researchers. Example in Argentina where the nationals do not obtain Argentine patents but do patent the incremental innovation in the US;
(d) The compulsory licenses in Colombia and Ecuador and in the latter case the proposed new code on inventions which in practice mean no patents at all;
(e) The drama of counterfeit medicines with Dominican Republic taking the most severe measures in spite of all the difficulties;
(f) The new plans of the Argentine INPI to promote innovation and take into account the examinations in other national patent offices; and
(g) What the new TTP means for the Pacific nations participating and the chances that it will be ratified.

Felix is open to answer any query you may have at cedieduca@cedi.org.ar

Here you can also find a highlight written by the Federal Court for Administrative Affairs, Mexico about the Seminar.

Mexico: time to oppose to trade mark registration

Patricia Covarrubia August 16, 2016 No comments:

At the end of this month (August 30, 2016) Mexico will implement an opposition system in trade mark.

In May this year the Latin America IPR SMEs Helpdesk and the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) collaborated on a roadshow in the UK. Participating in one of this workshops in Reading we cover ‘Intellectual Property Rights in Latin America – sources of help and support’ and one of the issues covered was the (lack of) trade mark opposition in Mexico.

Mexico is one of the few countries which does not provide for trade mark opposition proceedings. The Instituto Mexicano de la Propiedad Industrial (IMPI) is the administrative authority legally authorized to conduct ex officio examinations of trade mark applications on absolute and relative grounds. As noted in the World Trademark Review, Mexico is not bound to introduce opposition proceedings as a result of its accession to the Madrid System, but this amendment would make the trade mark system more efficient. Colombia was the first Latin America emerging country to ratify the Protocol on the Madrid Agreement (2012), then Mexico (2013). Cuba signed in 1995.

On 23 August José Miguel Mena López, Legal Services Manager at Clarke, Modet & Cº Mexico will be holding a Webinar on the implementation of the opposition system in Mexico. Details of the Webinar and how to registry can be found here.

IMPI VS REPUVE: DE LOS EXCESOS AL ABSURDO JURÍDICO

Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb) July 21, 2016 No comments:

Durante décadas el Instituto Mexicano de la Propiedad Industrial (en adelante IMPI), se caracterizó por ser una institución transparente y de gran reconocimiento por sus criterios al momento de emitir resoluciones, que robustecían la generación de tesis y jurisprudencia en los Tribunales Federales.

Es así que incluso llevó a buen puerto en la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación temas trascendentes como la primer Controversia Constitucional en materia de Denominaciones de Origen de México, protegiendo a los productores de chile habanero la península de Yucatán.

Sin embargo, tal parece que algo se rompió en la actual administración, ya que desde el inicio de este periodo son muchas las voces que desde diversos medios de circulación nacional (aquí y aquí) e internacional (aquí) han acusado al Instituto Mexicano de la Propiedad Industrial de favorecer a ciertos despachos y abogados con diversas resoluciones en materia de marcas y patentes.

Lo cierto es que, desde nuestra perspectiva, esas voces parecen llevar un cierto grado de verdad al presenciar asuntos como el que se contiene en el PC 1454/2015 (N-385) 11933 en el que se resuelve una acción de nulidad “de oficio”, y lo pongo entre comillas porque son contados los asuntos que el IMPI toma como oficiosos.

La marca REPUVE propiedad de un particular, desde 2009 ha venido ganándole todas las instancias a la Secretaría de Gobernación hasta lograr la firmeza de esas sentencias ante Tribunales Colegiados de Circuito. Sin embargo, a finales del 2015 el IMPI inició de manera oficiosa una nueva acción de nulidad de la marca reproduciendo prácticamente los argumentos y contenido de los procedimientos contenciosos y juicios previamente resueltos.

Al tratarse de las mismas partes, misma marca a anular e incluso los mismos argumentos, cualquier abogado promovería acciones para hacer valer la “COSA JUZGADA” o el principio “NON BIS IN IDEM”; sin embargo el IMPI de forma ruin, se desmarcó señalando que aún cuando la acción de nulidad la inicio la misma actora de los juicios anteriores, es decir, la Secretaría de Gobernación, ellos como autoridad la admitieron de forma oficiosa y por ello se asumen como actores, rompiendo esa identidad de partes.

Dicho esto, el IMPI se convierte en actor y autoridad resolutoria en un procedimiento totalmente ilegal, ya que, repito, el IMPI se asume como Juez y Actor a la vez, por lo que obviamente se resuelve a favor en menos de un mes un recurso que dilata generalmente entre 8 meses y un año.

Sin embargo, lo verdaderamente grave y absurdo de la situación recae en el fundamento de su declaración oficiosa de nulidad, en la que van más allá de la Ley y de la lógica y expresamente señalan que el REGISTRO PÚBLICO VEHICULAR es una ORGANIZACIÓN referida por una ASOCIACIÓN DE PERSONAS REGULADA POR UN CONJUNTO DE NORMAS EN FUNCIÓN DE FINES DETERMINADOS.

Esto lo sostiene el IMPI aún y cuando el legislador permanente en la Ley del Registro Público Vehicular vigente, expresamente define al Registro Público Vehicular como:

“Artículo 1.- La presente Ley tiene por objeto establecer y regular la operación, funcionamiento y administración del Registro Público Vehicular. Sus disposiciones son de orden público y de observancia general en todo el territorio nacional.

El Registro Público Vehicular es un instrumento de información del Sistema Nacional de Seguridad Pública, que tiene como propósito otorgar seguridad pública y jurídica a los actos que se realicen con vehículos.”

“Artículo 7.- El Registro estará conformado por una base de datos integrada por la información que de cada vehículo proporcionen las autoridades federales, las Entidades Federativas y los sujetos obligados a realizar las inscripciones y a presentar los avisos, de conformidad con lo dispuesto en esta Ley.”

Es decir que el IMPI, en su exceso y absurdo proceder, otorga personalidad jurídica a un “instrumento de información” que se compone por bases de datos, lo que a todas luces constituye un fraude a la ley, y atenta contra el Estado de Derecho al atribuirse facultades legislativas que no son propias de un organismo público descentralizado.

Así de crítica está la situación en el IMPI, por lo que ahora deberán pronunciarse la Sala Especializada en Propiedad Intelectual y su caso los Tribunales Federales. Estaremos atentos.

* Nuevamente, como ya lo hicimos en nuestro post del 23/11/2015, invitamos a nuestros amigos del IMPI para que nos contacten y expongan su versión sobre este asunto.

Post preparado por Hugo Alday (Alhen Abogados) y publicado previamente en Lvcentinvs.

México: Se aprueba reforma a la Ley de Propiedad Industrial – Llegan las Oposiciones!!

Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb) December 16, 2015 No comments:

El Pleno del Senado de la República aprobó con 75 votos a favor el dictamen que contiene proyecto de decreto por el que se reforma y adiciona la Ley de la Propiedad Industrial, que tiene por objetivo establecer un “Sistema de oposición”, que beneficie al sistema de propiedad industrial y a sus usuarios.

Con la aprobación de este sistema de oposiciones, se espera que el Instituto Mexicano de la Propiedad Industrial (IMPI) evalué de mejor manera el registro de un signo distintivo a fin de evitar la expedición de títulos que podrían invadir un derecho previamente concedido o, en su caso, sustraer del dominio público denominaciones comunes en una industria determinada.

De acuerdo a lo señalado en la iniciativa aprobada:

“Se estima que la inclusión de la oposición al registro de un signo distintivo disminuirá la presentación de solicitudes de declaración administrativa de nulidad, en particular aquellas fundamentadas en registros otorgados por error o inadvertencia del Instituto”.

También se espera que disminuya el número de solicitudes de declaración administrativa de infracción.

Tal y como señalamos hace varios años en IPtango, con la llegada de las oposiciones, el registro de signos distintivos en México podrá ser más dinámico y de mayor interacción entre los sujetos intervinientes.

Recomendamos la lectura del artículo sobre El Sistema de Oposición en México escrito por los Lvcentinvs Juan Ángel Garza Vite y Angel Diez Bajo.

Fuente: Quadratin.