Strauss Misses the Deadline to Oppose אצבעות

EZBAOT

 

Nestle filed Israel trademark number 240595 for Dietetic foods and substances adapted for medical and clinical use; formulated milk, food beverages and food substances for babies and children; food and food substances for babies, children and invalids adapted for medical use; foods and food substances for pregnant and nursing mothers adapted for medical use; nutritional and dietary supplements adapted for medical use; vitamin preparations, mineral food preparations; medicated confectionery; all included in class 5, and for vegetables and potatoes (preserved, frozen, dried or cooked), fruits (preserved, frozen, dried or cooked), mushrooms (preserved, dried or cooked), meat, poultry, game, fish and seafood, all these products also in the form of extracts, soups, jellies, pastes, preserves, ready-made dishes, frozen or dehydrated; jams; eggs; milk, cream, butter, cheese and other food preparations having a base of milk; milk substitutes; milk-based beverages; milk-based beverages containing cereals, chocolate and/or coffee; milk-based and cream-based desserts; yoghurts; soya milk (milk substitute); edible oils and fats; non-dairy creamers; sausages; charcuterie; peanut butter; soups, soup concentrates, broth, stock cubes, bouillon, consommes; all included In class 29, and for Biscuits, cookies, cereals, breakfast cereals, muesli, corn flakes, cereal bars, ready-to-eat cereals; cereal preparations; rice, pasta, noodles; foodstuffs having a base of rice, of flour or of cereals in class 30.

The mark is shown above. It is a stylized mark for the word Ezbaot meaning fingers.

The mark published for opposition purposes on 24 March 2013, and the Strauss group filed a laconic opposition to the mark on 24 June 2013, requesting an extension to provide proper grounds for opposition, and claiming that the sides were negotiating.

The commissioner Assa Kling considered the request to be a timely filed but groundless opposition, and the request for an extension to provide arguments as being a request to correct the statement of case. He refused to grant the extension unless Nestle agreed.

COMMENTS

As opposition proceedings may be less unpleasant than annulment proceedings I suppose that Nestle may agree to an extension.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: