On June 8, 2021, an order of the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation No 155 will come into force introducing significant clarification amendments to the patent regulations governing the assessment of the inventive step and sufficiency of disclosure of the inventions relating to new forms and derivatives of the known chemical compounds.

In particular, Rule 77 of the Rules (inventive step) has been amended to include the paragraph as follows:

Inventions are not acknowledged as meeting the inventive step criterion if they are based, in particular:

"- on the creation of a chemical compound, which is a form of a known chemical compound (in particular, an isomer, stereoisomer, enantiomer, amorphous or crystalline form) or its derivative (in particular, a salt, solvate, hydrate, complex compound or ether/ester), if such a compound does not exhibit new properties from qualitative or quantitative perspectives as compared to the known compound, which do not follow to a specialist explicitly from the prior art."

Rule 47 of the Requirements was supplemented by a new subclause 6, specifying that:

"6) if the invention relates to a chemical compound, which is a form of a known chemical compound (in particular, an isomer, stereoisomer, enantiomer, amorphous or crystalline form) or its derivative (in particular, a salt, solvate, hydrate, complex compound or ether/ester), the information about its new qualitative or quantitative properties as compared to the known compound, which do not follow to a specialist explicitly from the prior art, as well as information that reliably supports the existence of such new properties shall be provided."

These legislative amendments are essentially aimed at legalizing the actual patent office and court practice that has developed in recent years, according to which, in order to acknowledge the non-obviousness of new forms and derivatives of a chemical compound, it must exhibit new unexpected properties as compared with the known forms and derivatives of the compound, while such properties must be supported by the reliable experimental data.

In view of the above-mentioned amendments, whenever a patent application pertains to a new derivative or form of a known chemical compound applicants are recommended to disclose the experimental support of any advantageous properties of such a new derivatives and/or forms in the specification, or at least be ready to submit the additional experimental data during substantive examination.

We at Patentica will be happy to answer any further questions you may have on this or other news and insights published on our website. Please feel free to contact us for more details at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

New Rules for Opposition procedure in Russia

Created on Thursday, 10 September 2020 00:00

By the joint Order of the Ministry of Science and High Education and Ministry of the Economic Development No.644/261, new Rules for Dispute Resolution of the Chamber for Patent Disputes of the Russian Patent and Trademark Office were introduced and came into force on the 6th of September 2020. The new rules has substantially changed the procedure to resolve appeals and oppositions submitted to the Chamber for Patent Disputes harmonizing the overall procedure with that applied by the Russian courts.

Legalizing the widely adopted unofficial practice of arranging for online meetings and hearings, partially due to continued COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, the Rules now formally allow parties to attend the proceedings via video conference calls. This shall only require a request from a respective participant two weeks before the hearing. Audio and video recordings of all hearings shall be available to all parties if requested within 4 months form the hearing.

All kinds of official correspondence, including notices of appeals and oppositions, requests, and responses may now be filed via the official RUTPO website by using a personal account. The official website information will include receipts of opposition filed and official notifications to participants shall contain necessary coded identifiers, allowing to access all case materials from their personal accounts.

Formality check of submitted documents shall be shortened from 1 month to just 5 business days. Upon payment of the official fee for opposition or appeal, the first hearing must be set within 1 month for appeals against the RUPTO’s decisions, and 2 months for other oppositions.

Possible postponements of hearings are now more specific and shortened. The board of examiners now may only postpone hearings for 1 month at most in case of additional questions or arguments presented by parties, or whether an opposition is accompanied by a significant number of documents. The same applies for a sudden sick leave of a member of the board. Hearing may be also postponed for no longer than 2 months due to participant’s motivated request and for no longer than 3 months if the board seeks for an independent expert’s opinion.

In contrast to the previous version of the Rules patent owners can now independently request the board to consider the amended claims during the procedure. Claims can be amended on the basis of application materials without broadening the patent scope before the opposition, which is supposed to provide patent owners more flexibility and freedom to keep patents in amended form. On the other hand, petitioners submitting oppositions may raise new grounds as a course of opposition procedure in response to patent proprietor’s line of arguments or suggested amendments.

To recap the new Rules substantially clarify the procedure at the Chamber for Patent Disputes making it more suitable and transparent for all participants and general public.

We at Patentica will be happy to answer any further questions you may have. Please feel free to contact us for more details at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

Eurasian system for the protection of industrial designs: update

Created on Sunday, 15 November 2020 00:00

Since early 1995 the Eurasian Patent Convention (the EAPC) has been effectively used to obtain Eurasian patents for inventions in up to eight former USSR countries via single prosecution procedure conducted by the Eurasian Patent Office. The popularity of this unified patenting system has been recongnized by many professionals from the EAPC contracting sates suggesting to generilize the system with respect to other objects of the intellectual property.        

As a result of this process the Protocol on the Protection of Industrial Designs under the EAPC was adopted during international diplomatic conference on September 9, 2020 in Nur-Sultan, the capital of Kazakhstan.  The Protocol was singned by six out of eight of the EAPC Contracting States including Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan.

According to the established procedure the Protocol will come into force with respect to the first free countries, which are going to ratify the Protocol (Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan and Armenia) on March 17, 2021. In Russia the Protocol was ratified on November 10, 2020 and will come into force on April 11, 2021.

The Eurasian Patent Office is going to announce a starting date of the Eurasian system for the industial designs during the fist half of 2021.    

Similarly to inventions the Protocol establishes the Eurasian system for the protection of industrial designs, which will allow to obtain a legal protection for an industrial design simultaneously in all of the Contracting States based on a single application submitted to the Eurasian Patent Office. Once a Eurasian patent on industrial desing is granted it can be made valid in any of the EAPC Contracting States upon payment of annuties fees. 


Starting from January 1, 2021, registration of pharmaceuticals in five member countries of the Eurasian Economic Union (Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia) must be carried out in accordance with the corresponding regulatory requirements of the Eurasian Economic Union (the EAEU)*. Once a certain drug is approved in either of the countries of the EAEU, following a standard formality procedure it can be automatically approved in the rest of the countries of the union.

This removes the previously existing administrative barrier on the way to a full-fledged launch of the integrated market of pharmaceuticals in the EAEU countries and further emphasizes the importance and cost-efficiency of patent protection provided by Eurasian patents as compared to the bunch of the national patents in the above-mentioned countries.

In addition starting from March 1, 2021 the Eurasian Patent Office (the EAPO) has launched a pilot version of the EAPO Pharmaceutical Register, which allows to search for patents associated with certain drugs by their International Non-proprietary Names (INNs).

At the moment the register is available in Russian only on the official website of the EAPO at

Also the EAPO Pharmaceutical Register provides further technical data about

- legal status of the corresponding Eurasian patents in all member countries of the Eurasian Patent Convention (the EAPC);

- information on patent term extensions issued for the corresponding Eurasian patents in all member countries of the EAPC;

- registered marketing approvals as regards the corresponding drugs in all member countries of the EAPC**, which served as a ground for patent term extensions;

- information on registered licensing agreements with respect to the corresponding Eurasian patents in all member countries of the EAPC.

To sum up:

     1) the new Rules for registration and examination of pharmaceuticals in the EAEU countries would allow pharmaceutical manufacturers to expand market penetration in view of the simplified registration procedure.

     2) the EAPO Pharmaceutical register is aimed at facilitating a search of Eurasian patents by INNs of drugs and obtaining further relevant bibliographic information about the patents in question and drugs regulatory data in the EAPC-member states.

The Register is being currently under continuous development and the Eurasian Patent Office invites Eurasian patents owners to submit requests for including corresponding Eurasian patents into the EAPO Pharmaceutical Register.

We at Patentica will be happy to assist you with that and answer any further questions you may have. Please feel free to contact us for more details at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

Patentica rankings among Russian IP firms by the RUPTO

Created on Sunday, 04 April 2021 00:00

Dear colleagues and frieds,

We are happy to inform you that accoridng to the recently published 2020 official statistics of the Russian Patent Office with 992 and 183 electronically filed patent applications for inventions and industrial desings respectively our company third year in a raw holds the TOP-3 and TOP-4 positions among various Russian IP firms by a number of patent application filings. Overall we are in the TOP-10 by the number of total filings (Patents&Trademarks).  

We consider this result as a great achievment, which is due to a big trust given to us from our international and local clients. We appreciate it a lot and we will do our best to carry on providing high stardard IP services.    

Please feel free to contact us anytime at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

The Fellowship of the Trademark, Eurasia Edition

Created on Wednesday, 03 February 2021 00:05

The Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) signed the Agreement on Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods of the Eurasian Economic Union on 3 February 2020. The Russian Federation was the first to ratify the Agreement: the Federal Law on Ratification was signed by the president Vladimir Putin on 9 November 2020. The Agreement will come into force once it is also ratified by other member states, i.e. by the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Kyrgyz Republic.

Within three months after the Agreement comes into force, the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission will adopt the Instruction for administrative proceedings, which will establish the regulations related to filing, examination and registration of Union Trademarks, Service Marks (including collective marks) and Appellations of Origin.

A Union Trademark will enjoy simultaneous protection on the territory of all member states, equal to protection granted to national trademarks. Enforcement of rights on the territory of each member of the Union will be effectuated in accordance with the national legislations.

An application for a Union Trademark can be filed with an IP Office in any member states, which will be referred to as the Office of Filing. Within one month after the filing date, the Office of Filing conducts formal examination of the mark. If all formal requirements are met, the application is published, and the Office of filing forwards the application to the IP Offices of other member states. The official language of communication is Russian.

Within three months after publication, any interested party can oppose the claimed mark. Examination on both absolute and relative grounds for refusing registration is conducted by the IP Offices of member states within six months after the Office of Filing forwards the published application to member Offices.

If the claimed mark is refused registration by one of the member states, it is automatically refused on the whole territory of the Union. In such a case, the applicant can transform the Union Trademark into national applications.

In case an identical trademark is registered for identical goods and/or services in all member states of the EAEU in the name of the same entity, such a party is entitled to file with any IP Office of the Union a request to issue a Union Trademark Certificate. Such a Union Trademark replaces national registrations without prejudice of rights.

Although Union Trademarks will not be subject to use requirements, they can be cancelled by an interested party for continuous non-use within any three years after the registration date. Use of the mark on the territory of at least one member state will be enough to keep registration in force within the whole Union.

The disposal of rights to a Union Trademark in accordance with an assignment agreement is possible only on the condition it refers to all member states, while licensing is allowed in one or several states.

The benefits of a Union Trademark are substantial in terms of the official fees and simplicity of trademark portfolio management. Further, although there has been no statement regarding the inclusion of Union Trademarks into the Madrid Protocol, it has a clear potential for that: since all EAEU states are members to Madrid Protocol, it is possible that, similarly with Benelux and European Union, EAEA at some point could be indicated as a unified designation.

We look forward to ratification of the Agreement by all states and issuance of the Instruction, that will mark the new step in the harmonized and convenient trademark protection in the Eurasian economic zone.

The website of the EAEU:

The full text of the Agreement:

Author: Ekaterina Kovaleva, Russian Trademark Attorney

Copyright owner fails to prove counterfeiting

Created on Wednesday, 09 September 2020 00:05

Sole entrepreneur Oleg Chernikov has filed in Commercial Court of Moscow city a lawsuit against Factor LLC, claiming counterfeiting of skateboard image, printed on T-shirts sold by the Defendant and requesting a compensation in excess of 26 million rubles. The Claimant has licensed the original image in 2013 and subsequently purchased all rights under an assignment contract in 2018. In 2016 he became aware of that a network of clothes shops sells t-shirts with prints, closely resembling the skateboard image, with a few details in common, including “Black Flag” punk rock music band logo on both.

The court of law, however, dismissed the suit, largely supporting the Defendant’s opinion that the t-shirt print was created independently from the copyrighted image and before the latter was assigned to the Claimant. An idea of upturned skateboard design cannot be copyrighted on its own and the details of both images differ greatly, allowing to presume absence of reworking. “Black flag” logo (consisting of four black bars) is a very widespread reference to a punk rock culture and may not be regarded as plagiarism evidence.

Both the 9th Court of Appeals and the Intellectual property Court have supported the decision of the first instance court.

For more details, see

In June 2019, Juniper Networks, Inc., the owner of “Juniper” Russian trademark, filed a trademark defense lawsuit against Juniper Shop LLC company from Moscow, and domain owner, hosting a web-shop for “Juniper” labeled communication products. The trademark owner, represented by Patentica, demanded to cease the trademark infringement by stopping sales, abandoning the domain, changing the legal name of Juniper Shop LLC and payment of compensation.

The Commercial court of Moscow has decided in favor of the Claimant, forbidding any further use of “Juniper” trademarks on the Internet, as well as administration of domain name. A compensation was also imposed on the administrator. However, the court has dismissed the claim for change of the Juniper Shop LLC legal name, noting that under Art. 1473 of the Civil code such a change is only possible in case an official business registrar advances a corresponding claim.

An appeal was filed by the lawyers from Patentica with 9th Commercial Court of Appeals, which has re-considered the case on the available evidence and sustained the appeal. The court has found that while the art. 1473 of the Civil Code does indeed allows filing a claim for compulsory change of a legal name only for an official business registrar, it does not prevent an owner of a prior registered trademark from defending its legal name by filing a lawsuit under general rules of articles 1474 and 1252 of the Code. Therefore, the Court of Appeals has changed the decision partially, obliging the Defendant to change its legal name within a month.

For more details, see

In July 2018 Inform Systema LLC has filed a lawsuit in the Commercial Court of Moscow against Data Express LLC, demanding a ban for use of AIBS MegaPro library system computer program (official registration No. 2011619614) due to infringement of its exclusive right to Mark-SQL program having the same function. The claimant believed the defendant’s program to be created as a result of re-working of claimant’s program without its consent.

An expert opinion, received within a court appointed examination in June 2019, stated that the defendant’s program was most probably created not in course of Mark-SQL program re-working. No derived styles, comments, programming approaches, unique names were found by the expert. As no other sufficient evidence of infringement was presented by the claimant, the court has stated that a fact of re-working cannot be based on a sole comparison of programs’ functions, dismissing the lawsuit. The Ninth court of appeals has supported this decision.

A cassation plea was filed by the claimant with the Intellectual property court in January 2020. The IP Court, has stated, that case materials do not contain any evidence, supporting the claimant’s position and arguments of the plea filed. As a cassation instance court, the IP Court cannot re-assess evidence and facts found by the lower instances courts. Therefore, the plea was dismissed.

For more details, see

In December 2018 Polymer CJSC has filed a lawsuit against Perspectiva LLC, demanding to recognize its patented utility model (Patent RU 150662) as dependent on utility model under patent RU 104560 held by the claimant, as well as to impose a ban on use of the above model. Both utility models describe railway sleeper pads. The earlier patent was granted to Mr. Akimov Vladimir, director general and shareholder of Polymer CJSC, who later licensed it to the claimant under an exclusive license contract. The defendant has received its patent from Tries LLC in 2017 under an assignment contract.

Having tried the case, the Moscow city commercial court has dismissed the lawsuit due to a non-applicable way of defense of exclusive rights. As under art. 1252 of the Russian Civil Code there is no provision for deeming the utility model as dependent among patentowner’s rights, Polymer CJSC could not file such a claim for restoration of its rights and interests. Recognition of patents’ dependency may be only a means of facts finding, but not a way of defense of rights as such. This decision was supported by the Ninths Court of Appeals in November 2019.

But in May 2020 the IP Court, having considered the cassation plea, has ruled that the claimant is indeed entitled to recognize the defendant’s utility model as dependent from its own patented model, using provisions of art. 1358.1 of the Civil Code. The essence of the case in question was not a termination of the defendant’s utility model, but an existence of a right to use thereof only with a claimant’s consent. Use of a dependent patented object of rights may be recognized as an infringement of another patentowner’s rights notwithstanding the fact of patent termination (or absence thereof).

Therefore, the IP Court ruled to overrule the decisions of both the first instance and appeal courts and to send the case to the Moscow city commercial court for a new trial.

For more details, see

Between 2005 and 2017 “Dilya Publishing” society have entered into several assignment and license contracts with Mr.Neumyvakyn Ivan, a naturalist writer, obtaining exclusive rights to his copyrighted works of literature. However, in 2018 the society learned that shortly before his death in April 2018 Mr. Neumyvakyn assigned a batch of his works to another firm (Neumyvakyn’s Health Center) by concluding a notarized agreement. As these works included the ones already assigned to the Dilya Publishing, the society filed a lawsuit against the assignee and the notary public, demanding a nullification of the contract in question.

In September 2019 the Moscow city commercial court dismissed the lawsuit as having been filed by a non-interested person, which was not a party to the notarized contract and whose rights and interests were not infringed by this contract. The court has also found no grounds for classifying the transaction as inherently void.

The claimant then filed a plea with the 9th court of appeals, which re-tried the case in December 2019 and reversed the initial decision. A panel of appeal judges has pointed out, that all assignment contracts between the late author and the publisher were still valid and not challenged in any way; hence there could be no subsequent assignment of rights, which the author had already disposed of. The court of appeals also noted that the claimant indeed had a legal interest in defense of exclusive rights owned and is entitled to a lawsuit against any contract that is a threat thereof. As the notarized agreement in question did infringe the claimant’s rights, the court of appeals has ruled in society’s favor, nullifying the notarized assignment.

A cassation plea was filed by the defendant with the IP Court, which tried the case in March 2020, but found no grounds behind its arguments and dismissed the plea. The case may be still reviewed by the Supreme Court of Russia (Judicial Chamber on Economic Disputes) and a corresponding plea has been already filed by the defendant.

For more details, see

On June 3, 2020 the IP Court, acting as a cassation instance court has studied a plea of an individual entrepreneur, Mr. Zakharov Andrey, a defendant in A76-23430/2019 case. The defendant appealed against a decision of Chelyabinsk region commercial court, which during in absentia proceedings found him to be an infringer of exclusive right to IR 1299228 trademark and copyrighted toys’ designs, adjudging a compensation of 170 thousand rubles (about USD 2400) in favor of Alpha Group Co., Ltd. This decision was later supported by 18th Court of Appeals.

Having disagreed with both acts, Mr. Zakharov pleaded for a retrial, claiming a wrongful estimation of evidence and groundless conclusions, not based on case materials.

The IP Court having reviewed the case, found no grounds for a retrial. As follows from the materials available, a fact of counterfeit toys’ selling was proved by a cashier’s receipt, video footage of purchase and a purchased toy, which is marked by claimant’s trademark and also copyrighted, being a work of visual art. There was no evidence, proving that some other toy was purchased.

A defendant’s notion on that he had not been allowed to present evidence due to non-informing on hearings, was also dismissed, as the case materials have confirmation on sending a due court notice to the defendant’s officially registered address.

Concerning a compensation amount, the IP Court has pointed out that the claimant had demanded a minimum allowed fixed size compensation of 10 thousand rubles per each act of infringement. That totaled to the above amount, which could not be deemed groundless and excessive with regards to case circumstances. As a cassation case court, the IP Court is not allowed to revise actual fact found by first instance and appeal courts.

Hence, the IP Court found no grounds for a re-trial, supporting the lower courts’ judicial acts. Due to a special provision of the Art. 291.1 of the Commercial Procedure Code, forbidding a second cassation trial for in absentia proceedings, this decision cannot be further appealed.

For more details, see

On 17 April the RU PTO approved a decision of the Chamber for Patent Disputes (Administrative board of RU PTO) which has satisfied a request of Afisha company, subsidiary of Rambler Group, for a partial cancellation of legal protection of “Yandex Afisha” word trademark, owned by OOO Yandex (limited liability company) and registered in August 2019 under No. 724232.

Being the owner of “Afisha” word trademark (with a priority dating back to year 1998) the Claimant believed the disputed trademark to be confusingly similar to it, as well as to several other trademarks owned by the Claimant and having Afisha designation in different forms. As a company mainly engaging in selling tickets and providing mobile applications for entertainment activities, the Claimant had a legal interest in partial nullification of “Yandex Afisha”, registered in relation to goods and services in classes 09, 16, 35, 38, 39, 41, 42 and 45 of the Nice Classification.

The trademark owner challenged the position of the Claimant insisting that the disputed trademark is a combined one, having Yandex designation as a “strong” component. Due to extensive use of “Afisha” designation by many businesses, it must be regarded as a weaker component, so its presence cannot make a designation to be confusingly similar with the Claimant’s trademark. “Yandex Afisha” designation, to the opinion of Yandex attorneys, was always associated with OOO Yandex. There was never any threat of confusion or customers’ misleading, as Yandex designation has been long used by Yandex company which has three well-known trademarks based on this designation in different forms.

Having considered the case, the Chamber decided that the disputed trademark is indeed similar phonetically and semantically to the Claimant’s trademark, having the latter one included in full as its part. As “Yandex Afisha” was registered with a priority for homogenous goods and services, its registration formally constituted a breach of provisions of Article 1483 (10) of the Civil Code.

Therefore the Chamber ruled in the favor of Afisha company, fully satisfying its request and cancelling the trademark in part requested.

For more details, see

Shift of terms in RU PTO and EAPO due to quarantine measures

Created on Thursday, 09 April 2020 00:05

In accordance with the recent Presidential decrees and other legal acts, the period until the end of April has been declared non-business days throughout the Russian Federation - for all legal persons, officials and businesses, not directly involved in communal services, medical help and other vital matters. The first five days in May are traditional May holidays and red letter days in Russia. Local governments in all regions, including Moscow, have introduced different quarantine measures, including a ban on personal attendance by employees of all business premises except those that have to continue their work.

With regards to this both RU PTO and EAPO had to change their schedule as well as rendering of official services.

EAPO has notified all applicants, patentowners and their representatives on that all terms for procedural actions, that have the last day within 28 March to 5 May 2020 shall be automatically continued to the first business day – May 6th. This shall apply to all actions under the Eurasian Patent Convention, Patent Regulations under the Eurasian Patent Convention and other acts, including payment of fees due. This shall NOT apply to filing of divisional applications and other terms that are counted until a certain action is done or condition is met. Prolongation of procedural terms under Rule 37(1) is available for all terms falling within the above dates, if a corresponding request is made before or on May 6th. If granted, a prolongation shall start from May 7th.

There are currently no official notifications from RU PTO concerning a shift of terms, but in accordance with existing legislation one may expect similar prolongations until the first business day. Update shall follow when any official information becomes available.

Neither RU PTO nor EAPO shall allow any visitor on their premises, not even for submitting documents. Only online filings, e-mail filings and filings by postal services are available. Hearings in the Chamber for Patent Disputes (RU PTO administrative board) may be attended in online mode only.

We shall keep you informed on all changes in RU PTO and EAPO activity caused by the recent virus outbreak.

Recently published charts of RU PTO confirm Patentica’s positions within the top filers of electronic applications received by RU PTO. With regards to year 2019 our company has achieved the following results:

6th place overall, 1 268 applications, 1.5 percent;

3rd place for inventions and utility models filed, 1 007 applications, 5.8 percent;

3rd place for industrial designs filed, 261 applications, 7.5 percent

Top Gear Trademark Cancellation Overruled

Created on Monday, 18 November 2019 00:05

On 3 February the Intellectual Property Court has returned a cassation plea filed by a sole entrepreneur Azamat Ibatullin, against a decision of the same court (as the first instance) in case No SIP-398/2018. The plea was received by the Court in December 2019 and suspended due to missing documents, confirming payment of official fee and due disclosure of plea contents to other litigants.

The case in question started in September 2018 when the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) appealed against the ruling of RU PTO, which cancelled legal protection of “Top Gear” national trademark (registration No. 538851) after Ibatullin’s request based on similarity thereof with his own TopGear trademark registration. In January 2019 the IP Court dismissed the appeal, but the court’s cassation instance (Presidium) ruled for a re-consideration of the case by other panel in May.

A retrial ended in October 2019 with BBC victory. The IP Court decided the Claimant’s actions on trademark nullification to be in bad faith and aimed on causing undue damages to the Defendant. Therefore, his claims were dismissed under abuse of rights rules of the Civil code (Art. 10).

The Netherlands’ Supreme Court denied an appeal of Spirits International B.V. (affiliated with SPI Group) against a decision adjudging the exclusive right to Stolichnaya and Moskovskaya trademarks in Benelux countries (Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg) to a Russian Federal Owned company Sojuzplodoimport.

This ruling is a final act in a series of litigations that have been continued since 2006, when the District Court of Rotterdam decided that Spirits International B.V. had acquired its rights illegally, which decision was supported by the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of the Netherlands in 2012-2013. Subsequently, in 2015, Spirits International was obliged to return the exclusive rights to the trademarks in question and pay out the damages in amount of profits. The Court of Appeals upheld this decision in 2018.

Sojuzplodoimport is a legal successor of a Soviet company with the same name, which was established in 1966, and registered Stolichnaya and Moskovskaya trademarks in 1974. After the company was privatized, the disputed trademarks were purchased by SPI group in 1997-1998; this purchase, however, was deemed void by the Supreme Commercial Court of Russia in 2001.

Nevertheless, SPI currently holds the rights to other “Stolichnaya” and “Moskovskaya” national trademarks around the globe, despite several lawsuits filed. Being well-known brands for vodka, they possess very high commercial value, so one may be sure that further litigations concerning their ownership shall follow.

Beer Brewery Is Fined for Unauthorized Use of FIFA Designations

Beer Brewing House Bavaria Company Group LLC was fined in December 2018 by the Federal antimonopoly Service (FAS) for 250 thousand rubles due to an unauthorized use of FIFA designation. The company advertised its subsidiaries’ products (beer) by offers via Internet to participate in a stimulating lottery with FIFA 2018 tickets as prizes. However, under a special law from June 2013 concerning FIFA Championship 2018, any sale, distribution or other realization of tickets may only be done under a contract with FIFA or its authorized subsidiaries. Besides, FIFA is an owner of a national trademark registration No. 600424 and an international trademark registration No.747778 for goods in 32 class and services in 35 and 41 classes of the Nice classification, including sale of tickets. With regards to these circumstances, the Federal Antimonopoly service has found the Company guilty of administrative fault and fined it under articles 14.6 of the Competition protection law and article 14.33 of the Administrative violations Code.

The Company filed a lawsuit against FAS decision with the Moscow Commercial Court, asking for cancellation thereof. The Court upheld the decision in April 2019, having deemed the actions of FAS to be based on duly discovered circumstances and legally justified. Appeals of the Company to the Ninth Court of Appeals and to the IP Court yielded no positive results. Both instances referred to the available information on a domain name owner and the Defendant having been its head organization. Failure to comply with competition protection legislation lead to sanctions against the group of companies as a whole.

New email server

Created on Monday, 05 November 2018 09:44

Dear Colleagues,

Starting from November 5, 2018, Patentica has launched a new mail server that meets the highest modern security standards. While we do our best to provide the most reliable services possible, if you experience any difficulty with sending emails to us or do not receive a confirmation email from us within one business day, please let us know via the contact form. Should this be the case we will contact you at the earliest convenience to solve the problem.

Thank you!


Starting from February 28, 2018, the Geneva Act comes into force in Russia. This means simplification and harmonization of formalities to be observed for international of industrial designs in multiple countries and regions.

Patentica is glad to offer its expertise in industrial designs and other IP objects in Russia and CIS counrties.

Patentica is among top-5 PCT filing Russian firms

Created on Thursday, 28 December 2017 09:44


According to the number of PCT applications filed through the period of 2014-2016 years, Patentica is among the top-5 most active Russian companies.
The lists for the selected countries was compiled by the Managing IP portal according to the total number of international PCT applications filed by the most active firms and agencies between January 2014 and December 2016 (the filing period) based on details of international PCT applications published on WIPO's website.

Patentica is very glad to contribute to the development of IP in Russia and makes much account for the professional qualification of lawyers and patent attorneys.

Patentica's patent attorneys Konstantin Inozemtsev and Victor Lisovenko explore business methods' patent eligibility according to the Russian patent law and possibilities to protect business methods via other forms of intellectual property in their article for Patent Lawyer.

You are welcome to contact This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. on more particular questions regarding business methods' protection in Russia.

On September 28th the Governmental Decree No.1151 has been officially published, coming into force from October 6th. This Decree amends the existing Schedule of official fees, increasing many of them, though some fees have been effectively decreased. 

The following key changes can be mentioned:



before 6 October 2017

starting 6 October 2017

Filing a patent application for invention

1650 + 250 for every claim exceeding 25

3300 + 700 for every claim exceeding 10

Filing a patent application for utility model

850 + 100 for every claim exceeding 25

1400 + 700 for every claim exceeding 10

Filing a patent application for industrial design

850 + 100 for every industrial design exceeding 1

1700 + 700 for every industrial design exceeding 1

Request for adding a new claim in the set of claims of a patent application for invention

650 for every new claim (if the request is filed before substantive examination)

2350 for every new independent claim (if the request is filed in the process of substantive examination)

700 for every new claim (if the request is filed before substantive examination)

4700 for every new independent claim (if the request is filed in the process of substantive examination)

Assignment of a patent application



Substantive examination of a patent application for invention

2450 + 1950 for every independent claim exceeding 1, but not exceeding 10, plus 3400 for each independent claim exceeding 10

12500 + 9200 for every independent claim exceeding 1 (if examination was requested at filing)

4700 + 2800 for every independent claim exceeding 1, but not exceeding 5, plus 5400 for each independent claim exceeding 5 (if examination was requested after filing)

Substantive examination of a patent application for utility model



Substantive examination of a patent application for industrial design

1650 + 1300 for every industrial design exceeding 1

3000 + 2500 for every industrial design exceeding 1

Extension of term for filing a response (invention, utility model, industrial design)

200 per month for the first 6 months (1-6 months)

400 per month for next 4 months (7-10 months)

800 per month for the first 6 months (1-6 months)

1100 per month for next 4 months (7-10 months)

Restoration of right to file a response (invention, utility model, industrial design)

650 (if a request for restoration was filed within 6 months)

2600 (if a request for restoration was filed after 6 months)


Patent publication



Patent registration


Patent grant


Renewal fees (patent for invention or industrial design)



Renewal fees (patent for utility model)



Patent registry change

2050 (for 1 amendment) (patent change + patent registry change)

2000 (for 1 amendment)

Patent assignment

1650 + 850 for each next patent assigned by the same agreement (this refers both to contractual and non-contractual assignments)

3300 + 1700 for each next patent assigned by the same agreement (this refers both to contractual and non-contractual assignments)

Filing of an application for trademark registration


2450** + 700** for each class exceeding 5

Trademark examination

11500 + 2050 for each class exceeding 1

8050** + 1750** for each class exceeding 1

Trademark registration

16200 (registration + certificate issuance)

11200** + 700** for each class exceeding 5

Trademark certificate issuance



Renewal fees (trademark)


20000 + 1000 for each class exceeding 5

Patentica's specialists are well aware of the recent changes in Russian and international IP practice and do their best to offer the most cost-effective strategies.

Patentica represented the interests of the well-known beet harvesting equipment producer Holmer Maschinenbau GmbH (Germany) in Lipetsk OFAS against the company's former agent in Russia, who had registered four trademarks using Holmer's logo and brand name without the German company's permission.

As a result of the proceedings, the Lipetsk OFAS recognized the actions of Holmer-Rus LLC as an act of unfair competition, issued an order to stop using trademarks with the designation "HOLMER / ХОЛМЕР"on the basis of Art. 14.4.(1) of the Federal Competition Law, and sent a decision to consider invalidation of legal protection of Russian trademarks No. 475273, No. 479726, No. 511943 , No. 518483 to the Federal Service for Intellectual Property (Rospatent).

Patentica's professionals do their best to assist their clients in any IP case.

A patentee's right to submit amended claims during an opposition procedure or invalidity proceedings is discussed in the article by Patentica's professionals Victor Lisovenko and Maria Nilova in the WIPR magazine.

To find more on this topic you can also read this article.

The recent procedural chenges regarding disputes over domain names in Russia and the impact of these changes are dicussed in the recent publication in Trademark Lawyer magazine by Patentica's professionals Yury Bondarev and Elena Dmitrenko.

Our specialists will be glad to answer your questions on legislation and practice relating to domain names and other intellectual property objects.

The FIPS annual report 2016

Created on Saturday, 08 April 2017 15:44

In the beginning of march the FIPS has published its annual report 2016 on its site. 

According to the document, in 2016 there was a decrease in the number of appplications for inventions (by 8,6%), utility models (by 6,7%), trademarks according to the international procedure (by 20,3%) - compared to 2015's figure. However, there was an increase in the number of application for design (by 10,9%), trademarks according to international procedure (by 15,7%), programs and databases (by 110,4%).

It is to be noted that there has been an acceleration in consideration of applications: the average time period for consideration of applications for inventions has shortened by 2% (up to 10.3 months), and for utility models  - by 24% (up to 2.8 months). A slight increase in the prosecution time for industrial designs and computer programs applications was pinned to an increase in the number of applications considered.

The statistics on the considered judicial dispute over the decisions, actions (inaction) of Rospatent cases is of particular interest - the number of such cases increased by 6% in 2016 (385 in 2015 against 407 in 2016). According to the report, said increase of dispute cases number can be attributed to the growth in the number of appeals on issues relating to payment, accounting and return of fees in case of refusal to perform the corresponding legally significant actions (the courts refused to satisfy such claims). The report also gives some preconditions to further growth of the number of applications for invalidation of Rospatent's decisions on the refusal to register a designation as a trademark - if the information about the producer of goods can be found only in Internet references, it cannot serve as the grounds for refusal to register a trademark during the examination stage. According to the ministry, based on such practice it is possible to predict an increase in the objections to granting legal protection to such trademarks filed by the manufacturers of the corresponding goods marked with such designations.

More particular information about other criteria of the FIPS' services and its trends over the precious year can be found in the summary tables enclosed шт the annex section of the report.

Patentica's professionals will help to find the best IP management strategy in Russia and other countries with due regard to all the possibilities available in current practice.

The copyright ownership of Epoch Co. Ltd. acknowledged

Created on Monday, 27 March 2017 13:13

Patentica is pleased to announce a positive litigation achievement on behalf of its Japanese-based client, a world-famous toy manufacturer Epoch against Russian toy seller and its former official distributor Gulliver, which after the breach of the distribution contract back in 2010 started to import very similar toys made oversees and sell them in Russia. On September 28, 2016 the Intellectual Property Court reversed the two earlier decisions of the court of lower instances both rejecting Epoch's allegations on copyright infringement. In particular the IP Court held that the earlier decisions were improper and sent the case for reconsideration to the court of the first instance. As the outcome of the new circle of litigation at the court of first instance Epoch and Gulliver settled the case on a mutually beneficial basis while Gulliver agreed to recognize Epoch's copyright on the disputed toys and stop the whole sales. The latest decision of the court of first instance affirming the settlement agreement was announced on February 14, 2017.

“Being able to successfully reverse the whole litigation proceedings after two decisions of the lower courts being not in a copyright holder's favour is not very common at the IP Court,” says Victor Lisovenko, a patent attorney at Patentica. “We’re grateful that the IP Court recognized Epoch's copyright on the disputed toys and made it very clear that the court of lower instances did not take all essential facts into account when rejecting the lawsuit” Alexander Timofeev, a lawyer at Patentica adds: "Epoch is a global player on the toys market for children, which puts a lot of efforts and assets in developing their innovative products. We are gratified that the company and its managers have entrusted us to defend their market position and despite receiving two negative decisions along the way did not stop to seek their legal rights protection and believe in successful outcome".

Epoch Co., Ltd. is a Japanese toy and computer games company founded in 1958 which is best known for manufacturing the Sylvanian Families series of toys. The company entered the Russian market with the Sylvanian Families toys in 2008, which have received a great popularity among Russian kids and their parents ever since. The above-mentioned copyright infringement considered in less than two years in total was initiated in 2015 to cease the import and distribution of ten families of toys such as foxes, rabbits, hedgehogs and others closely mimicking the unique design of the corresponding Sylvanian families created by Epoch's employees over the period from 1985 to 2012. Apart from resolving the dispute per se the decisions taken by the court are interesting from the legal standpoint clarifying the concepts and approaches used to consider copyright infringement cases.

All the decisions taken during the litigation are available in Russian at by the case # А40-80402/2015.

For more details and questions please contact Patentica at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . We would be glad to share our experience and help our clients to manage their IP.

According to the announcement on the EAPO Official Internet site, EAPO has adopted the new edition of Patent Reguations.

The following changes саn be mentioned:
1.Objections to extension of Eurasian patnet now can be filed by third parties (Rule 16 of the Regulations).
2. Insufficiency of disclosure of an invention can now serve as an independent basis for cancellation of the Eurasian patent and its invalidation on the territory of the state party to the Convention (Rules 53 and 54 of the Regulations).
3. The procedure for easing time limits for the procedural actions for obtaining a Eurasian patent is now harmonized with the provisions of the Patent Law Treaty (PLT) and the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) (Rules 37 and 38 of the Regulations). 
4. Now there is only one criterion of "unintentionality" is applied when considering requests for restoration of rights with respect to a Eurasian application or a Eurasian patent (Rule 39 of the Regulations).
5. During consideration of objections to decisions of the Eurasian Office on refusal to grant a Eurasian patent Applicants now can submit amended claims (Rule 49 of the Regulations)
6. All EAPO's outgoing correspondence sent electronically, as well as electronical materials of Eurasian Applications and patents now have oficial legal status (Rules 21 and 62 of the Regulations). 
7. The scope of persons having privileges on payment of patent duties is (rule 40 of the Patent instruction) is now specified.

Patentica's staff is well aware of all the changes in Russian and Eurasian practice and will be glad to help in reduction of IP management expences. 

EAPO is increasing official fees starting from 1 January 2017

Created on Wednesday, 21 December 2016 13:13

According to the announcement on the EAPO Official Internet site, EAPO introduces increased fees that come into force from 1 January, 2017. The new Patent Regulations and Statute on Fees(English summary here) apply for granted Eurasian patents and applications, either pending or new.

Patentica's professionals would be glad to consult upon fees estimation and possible reduction thereof.
You can estimate the cost of filing a Eurasian application according to the new official fees in our free online Calculator or ask for a detailed estimation on This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

Amending claims during post-grant opposition proceedings

Created on Monday, 14 November 2016 13:13

The Journal of the Intellectual Property Court (IP Court) has published an article (in Russian) about the possibilities of amending patent claims during post-grant opposition proceedings.


According to the PCT filing survey by RWS inovia, Patentica has climbed up on the third place in the rank of the top PCT filers in Russia.

It is the second year Russian filers are included in the survey, and Patentica shows inspiring results compared to the 2015 PCT survey

According to the PCT filing survey by RWS inovia, Patentica has climbed up on the third place in the rank of the top PCT filers in Russia.

It is the second year Russian filers are included in the survey, and Patentica shows inspiring results compared to the 2015 PCT survey

As a result of series of meetings held during the annual Assemblies of the member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization in Geneva from October 3 to 11, 2016, EPO President Benoît Battistelli and Rospatent Director General Grigory Ivliev signed the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) pilot program.


Russian patent documents now available on Google Patents

Created on Wednesday, 31 August 2016 15:02

On August, 30 Google announced that 11 new countries had been added to Google Patents search service with Russia among them.

This means that starting from August, 30 Russian patents and patent applications are added to the search base of Google Patents. What is more, in order to provide the full-featured service all the documents have been translated to Engish using Google Translate. 

Back in May 2016 the Russian Patent Office has approved the new Administrative patent regulations on inventions and Rules for drafting, filing and examining patent applications. These new legal documents form the updated regulation system of patenting inventions in Russia and provide in depth details of new amendments of Part IV of the Civil Code which have come into effect since October 1, 2014. Although some specific requirements will be most accurately explained by the corresponding law enforcement practice, the basic differences between old and new requirements can be already seen with a naked eye.


Starting from July 1st 2016 a Pilot program for accelerated substantive examination is available at the EAPO for PCT international applications entering regional phase at the EAPO. The program aims at shortening the examination as well as improving its quality.


On June 17th the Government of the Russian Federation has adopted a Decree No548 with Rules of subsidizing of Russian organizations (manufacturers and exporters) for reimbursement of their expenses borne on patenting abroad. The Rules only contain basic regulations and main requirements for subsiding granting; more detailed bylaws on the subject are to be laid out by the Ministry of Industry and Commerce. A few points, though, are of interest already.


During his speech at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, MIT professor Loren Graham pointed to the main reasons why, in his opinion, Russians are very good in inventing, but have not succeeded in innovation.


Foreign Patenting Support Center for Russian applicants

Created on Thursday, 02 June 2016 17:02

Russian Export Center JSC is reported to be working on creation of Foreign Patenting Support Center for Russian applicants. Its key function is expected to be in development of grants and subsidization projects for start-ups and small entities having IP as the basic capital.

According to the EAPO order dated May 31, 2016, accelerated examination can be provided on request with the fee payment as stated by the new edition of the Regulations on procedures for the provision of services by the EAPO


The scope of the Pilot Program under Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) between the Eurasian Patent Office (EAPO) and the Japan Patent Office (JPO) has been extended as well as its term has been prolonged until February 14, 2018 by mutual agreement of the parties.

Patentica is glad to congratulate Diakont JSC on its RU 2564157 patent for invention "Drive for pipeline valves" having being chosen among 100 Best Inventions of Russia in Year 2015.

Starting in 2007, this list is annually compiled by Rospatent experts from the most prominent and promising patents, whose commercial realization is thought to add significantly to a further industrial development and GDP growth of Russia. The finalists are chosen by a joint commission headed by the Director of the Federal Institute of Industrial Property (FIPS, subsidiary of Rospatent) and then announced on web-site of FIPS.

Our attorneys and experts hope for a further fruitful collaboration with talented inventors and managers of Diakont, helping them to secure company’s IP assets both in Russia and abroad.

EPO and Rospatent are planning to sign a bilateral PPH argeement

Created on Saturday, 20 February 2016 17:02

On February 15-17 Rospatent delegation visited the EPO in Munich. As a result of this meeting a biennial working plan was signed.

Among the most important aspect of the meeting was dicussion of a Memorandum of Understanding to be concluded imminently on a bilateral Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) agreement. The Parties tentatively agreeв to sign the areement by the end of summer 2016.


Patentica would like to congratulate a long-standing client and Russia’s most prolific inventor, Mr. Alexandre Tishin, with a recent designated publication in Forbes Russia edition dedicated to his biography, scientific ideas, collaborative work with colleagues and multiple inventions created as result of this work. We wish Alexandre every success in his further research and business activities, always remaining ready to help in securing his intellectual property.

In 2015 the number of patent applications filed by PATENTICA on behalf of its clients has increased by 15% to 1,199 – up from 1,040 in 2014. According to the RosPatent (Russian Patent Office) report on electronic filings released at the end of November 2015, PATENTICA climbed to 5th position in the overall ranking of Russian IP firms for the number of patents and utility model applications filed in Rospatent in 2015.


As was recently announced by Rospatent representatives, starting January 16th, the Chamber for Patent Disputes (RU PTO subdivision acting as an appeal board for patent cases) shall allow for participation in hearings by means of video conference calls.


WIPO is planning to enhance Patentscope search system

Created on Wednesday, 23 December 2015 18:44

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has disignated InfoChem for the project "Addition of chemical search capabilities to the WIPO PATENTSCOPE search system".


Validation of European patents in Moldova

Created on Friday, 23 October 2015 13:18

On 1 November 2015 an agreement between the European Patent Office (EPO) and the Republic of Moldova will enter into force, allowing European patents to take legal effect in Moldova. From this date, patent applicants shall be able to validate their European patent applications and granted patents in Moldova.


Patentica's delegates, Ms. Maria Nilova (Chem., Managing partner) and Mr. Eduard Shablin (Mech.Eng.) will participate in the upcoming IP Service World International Congress & Trade Fair in Munich on November 23-24, 2015.

We will be glad to meet our colleagues, share our experience and discuss partnership.
If you wish to arrange a meeting with Patentica representatives, please feel free to send us a letter at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Dear Colleagues, we are pleased to inform you that delegates from Patentica, Mr. Victor LISOVENKO (Chem.) and Mr. Eduard SHABLIN (Mech.Eng.) will be attending the upcoming AIPPI 2015 World Intellectual Property Congress in Rio de Janeiro from October 10-14, 2015.

If you wish to arrange a meeting with Patentica representatives, please feel free to send us a letter at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Patentica's team attended the Annual Meeting of the International Trademark Association.


Patents for Humanity 2015 winners awarded in the White House

Created on Friday, 24 April 2015 18:53

On April, 20 the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and the USPTO held the Patents for Humanity award ceremony in the White House.


Shopping center “Chkalovsky” retains its name

Created on Sunday, 01 February 2015 00:05

The Intellectual Property Rights Court has dismissed a claim of Olga Chkalova, the daughter of the famous Russian pilot Valery Chkalov, to deprive the Perm company “Faund”, LLC. (Perm is the city in Russia), of its right in a trademark “Chkalovsky” used for the network of shopping centers. Valery Chkalov was a Soviet pilot who was the first ever person who made a flight from the USSR to the USA via the North Pole in 1937. In the Court, Olga Chkalova together with the Chkalov Memorial and Charity Fund has appealed the decision of the Chamber on Patent Disputes of the Russian Patent and Trademark Office (Rospatent) which has dismissed their opposition previously.


Patentica participated in London IP Summit 2014

Created on Monday, 10 November 2014 01:28

Patentica's patent attorneys Mr. Evgeny Enbert and Mr. Eduard Shablin participated in London IP Seminar 2014 held on October 13-14, 2014 in London Stock Exchange. Being a speaker, Mr. Enbert delivered a presentation about recent changes to the Russian patent law came in force on October 1, 2014. Mr. Enbert and Mr. Shablin express their thanks to IPR Connections, the organizer of the event, for perfect organization and hospitality. Mr. Enbert and Mr. Shablin would be pleased to answer any questions regarding the presentation, which may be sent to their personal emails at: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . The presentation is available for download via the link.

А new revision of the IP legislation has come into force in Russia

Created on Tuesday, 09 December 2014 00:05

А new revision of the IP legislation has come into force in Russia on October 1, 2014, affecting a range of topics, including inventions, utility models, industrial designs and transfer of ownership. Patentica's attorneys Ms. Maria Nilova and Ms. Elena Dmitrenko describe briefly the changes in an article recently published in World Intellectual Property Review. To request a detailed information relating these changes, please feel free to send a letter to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

Patentica’s patent and trademark attorneys Ms. Maria Nilova, Ms. Olga Gribanova, Ms. Olga Galygina, Mr. Konstantin Inozemtsev and Mr. Victor Lisovenko took part in the seminar organized by the Japanese national Group of AIPPI and were happy to deliver presentations about Patent and Trademark prosecution and enforcement in Russia on October 8, 2014 in Tokyo, Japan.


Russia has improved its global innovation index 2014 ranking

Created on Tuesday, 12 August 2014 12:38

According to the results of The Global Innovation Index 2014,  that were announced on July 18, 2014, Russia holds 49th position by GII 2014 among 143 countries. This ranking is 13 points higher than one of the previous reporting year. The leadership in innovative economics is held by Switzerland, United Kingdom and Sweden. The growing ecomony of China also showed positive dynamics and holds 29th position.

Experts of EPO visited Patentica

Created on Tuesday, 12 August 2014 11:40

 On July 7, 2014 Experts of the European Patent Office Dr. Ingo Seelmann, Dr. Sofia Papathoma and Dr Jean-Dominique Moriggi visited Patentica in Saint-Petersburg. As a part of the EPO's program of forging closer ties with international applicants our guests hold a workshop on the basics of the examination, peculiarities in examination of applications relating to polymorphic forms, and some aspects of examination of pharmaceutical inventions in the EPO. We very much appreciate the competence and communicability of our colleagues from EPO and thank them for providing such useful information and answering our questions.

Batch Of Counterfeit Toys Stopped By Customs

Created on Tuesday, 27 May 2014 00:05

A batch of imported goods, including more than five thousands of plastic kittens and tablet computers marked with “My Talking Tom” logo was detained by Siberian Customs Department, when it was found that the owner of “Talking Tom Cat” trademark, Outfit7 Ltd. company from Cyprus, never gave any consent for its use in relation to the goods in question. An administrative offense case was opened based on article 14.10 of the Administrative offenses Code (Illegal Use of a Trademark).


Recently, the Saint Petersburg Chamber of Commerce has come with a public initiative to amend Article 1487 of the Civil Code of Russian Federation, in order to provide for a less restrictive imports of trademark-labeled goods. As of now, the article allows only usage of a trademark in relation to the goods that were introduced into civil circulation in Russia by a trademark owner or with its consent, thus effectively banning an unauthorized importation of non-counterfeit trademarked goods from abroad (so-called parallel import).


BIO 2014 CONVENTION on June 22 - 26, 2014 in San Diego

Created on Thursday, 08 May 2014 00:05

PATENTICA will be represented at the BIO 2014 CONVENTION on June 22 - 26, 2014 in San Diego by the following team:

Maria Nilova, Russian and Eurasian Patent Attorney, Managing Partner;

Vadim Chagin, Russian and Eurasian Patent Attorney,

Ksenia Buinevich, Translations Manager;

Alexandra Nilova, Client Relations Manager.

Please contact us at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. to arrange a meeting with our attorneys.

See you in San Diego!!!!

PATENTICA will be represented at the AIPPI 2014 World Intellectual Property Congress in Toronto, Canada, on September 14-17, 2014

by Vasily Andreev, Russian and Eurasian Patent Attorney.

Please contact us at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. to arrange a meeting with our attorney.

See you in Toronto!!!!


Created on Monday, 05 May 2014 00:05

On April 29, 2014 PATENTICA and PLOUGMANN & VINGTOFT has presented a seminar, devoted to POSSIBILITIES OF PATENTING IN EUROPE

The following talks were given:

1) Doing business in Europe: why do you need a patent?
Thomas Sundien, PLOUGMANN & VINGTOFT and
David Hendriksen, PLOUGMANN & VINGTOFT

Download presentation

2) Patent and Trademark protection and enforcement in Europe and Scandinavia
Thomas Sundien, PLOUGMANN & VINGTOFT and
David Hendriksen, PLOUGMANN & VINGTOFT

Download presentation

3) Practical examples of recent court cases in Russia and introduction of changes to CCRF 4 Part
Yury Bondarev, PATENTICA

Download presentation

PATENTICA will be represented at the PTMG Autumn Conference on October 8, 2014 - October 11, 2014 in Chicago by Marina Karaldina, Russian Trademark Attorney.

Please contact us at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. to arrange a meeting with the Russian Trademark Attorney who will be happy to answer your questions.

See you in Chicago!!!!

PATENTICA will be represented at the Annual Meeting of the International Licensing Executives Society in Moscow on May 18-22, 2014 by the following patent attorneys:

Victor Lisovenko, Russian and Eurasian Patent Attorney, Chemistry;

Elena Tsvetkova, Russian and Eurasian Patent Attorney, Biophysics.

Further, Olga Galygina, Russian and Eurasian Patent Attorney, Head of Chemistry and Biotechnology Team, and

Eduard Shablin, Russian and Eurasian Patent Attorney, Director of Moscow Office,

will be happy to see you at our Booth during LES Meeting and answer your questions.

Please contact us at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. to arrange a meeting with our attorneys.

See you in Moscow !!!!

PATENTICA will be represented at the 136th Annual Meeting of the International Trademark Association in Hong Kong on May 10-15, 2014 by the following patent attorneys:

Elena Dmitrenko, Russian and Eurasian Patent Attorney, Trademark Attorney, Partner;

Maria Nilova, Russian and Eurasian Patent Attorney, Managing Partner;

Olga Gribanova, Russian Trademark Attorney, Head of Trademark and Designs Team;

Evgeny Enbert, Russian and Eurasian Patent Attorney, Head of Mechanics and Electronics Team;

Eduard Shablin, Russian and Eurasian Patent Attorney, Director of Moscow Office;

Please contact us at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. to arrange a meeting with our attorneys.

See you in Hong Kong !!!!

Microsoft Wins a Trial Over Internet Domain

Created on Thursday, 19 December 2013 00:05

In October 2013 Microsoft corporation filed a lawsuit against Evgeny Bakharev, administrator of domain, requesting the stoppage of the illegal use of XBOX trademarks and a compensation of 500 thousand rubles. A notary surveillance certificate confirming the contents of a website hosted on the domain and a note from the registrar disclosing the identity of the administrator were attached to the lawsuit. The Claimant argued that the use of the trademarks (registered under numbers 251232, 229851 and 207755) by the Defendant in the domain name and on the website was not authorized in any way and therefore illegal.


A Consignment of Dolls Stopped In Vladivostok

Created on Friday, 06 December 2013 00:05

In November a Russian importer firm declared Chinese toys for importation, submitting a bill of entry within Vladivostok customs office. During customs clearance procedures the officials suspected some of the toys, mostly plastic and mechanical dolls, of being counterfeit ones. Several hundred dolls and sets of dolls were marked with “Monster Princess”, “MH, Monster Girl”, “MH, Monster High” and other designations closely resembling “MONSTER HIGH” trademark, owned by Mattel Inc.


A Batch of Counterfeit Automotive Cosmetics Seized

Created on Tuesday, 19 November 2013 00:05

During a recent police raid on Moscow “South Port” auto market a batch of more than 12 tons of different China made enamel paints, polishes, sealants and other products labeled with “ABRO” trademark was detected in a hangar owned by a local entrepreneur. When compared against genuine samples in presence of trademark owner representative, these goods were found counterfeit and seized. The police had to deploy seven trucks to remove them completely.


Philip Morris Loses "Streamliner" Trademark

Created on Tuesday, 05 November 2013 00:05

Moscow Commercial court satisfied the claim of British American Tobacco to cancel the legal protection of “Streamliner” trademark (registration RU 640088) belonging to Philip Morris.


Litigation Settlement Between An Infringer And a Trademark Licensee

Created on Wednesday, 02 October 2013 10:00

On 27 September 2013 an amicable agreement between a licensee of “Westland” trademark (RU 288898) and an owner of a retail network was concluded and approved by a resolution of the St.Petersburg Commercial Court.


200 Thousands Of Sponge Bob Towels Sent To a Landfill

Created on Tuesday, 01 October 2013 00:05

In summer 2013 a half a ton batch of paper towels was shipped to Novorossiysk, unloaded and placed under a customs control. At the end of the August the consignee decided to move the goods for temporary customs storage and found that all the towels bear a printed image of the famous cartoon hero. Soon he also became aware that no consent from Nickelodeon for use of the image was ever granted to the manufacturer.

The towels underwent a customs extermination procedure and on September 26 were disposed of by burying them into a local landfill.


In August 2012 ZAO RosBusinessConsulting, the owner of “РБК” trademark, became aware of existence of OOO RosBusinessConsulting, a company from Kaluga, who had also used “РБК” brand in its activity, including Web advertisements. A reply to a cease and desist letter with a demand to rename and stop trademark usage was sent by the infringer with a big delay, when the lawsuit was already filed into the Moscow Commercial Court. The Claimant’s plea contained all above stated demands along with an extra demand to compensate the illegal use of the trademark in a sum of 500 thousand roubles (approx. 16650 USD). Due to a Defender’s registered place of activity being situated in Kaluga (a capital of Kaluzhskaya Oblast), the suit was passed for a trial into the Commercial Court of Kaluzhskaya Oblast.


On July the 2nd, by the Decree of the President the next 3 vacant justices’ positions in the Intellectual Rights’ Court were filled. Thus, the Court now has the needed number of judges to officially start the administering of justice.


On Monday, June 17th, Moscow State Arbitration Court passed the final decision in a case No А40-155357/12, reclaiming domains,,, from their administrator, prohibiting their further use as infringing the exclusive rights of CILEK ® trademark owner.


The producer of television series about the famous detective failed to prove Rospatent’s fault before the Chamber for Patent disputes.


Elena, the daughter of Yury Gagarin, has lost a case in the Chamber on patent disputes against Moscow shopping and entertainment mall "Gagarinsky". She had demanded to deprive OOO "Gagarinsky torgovo-razvlekatelnyi centr" (“Gagarinsky shopping and entertainment mall”, limited company) of the right to the trademark with the same name, but nevertheless, Rospatent officials have not found any ground for satisfaction of her claim.


Commencement of the PPH Pilot Program

Created on Monday, 25 March 2013 11:28

Eurasian Patent Office reports that Patent Prosecution Highway Pilot Program (PPH) between the Eurasian Patent Office (EAPO) and the Japan Patent Office (JPO) begins on February 15, 2015. All the necessary information about the Program and application forms for conduction of an accelerated patent examination in accordance with PPH and PCT-PPH between EAPO and JPO are located here.

The Patent Prosecution Highway Pilot Program between the JPO and Rospatent was first launched in 2009, and on 1 January 2012 Japan Patent Office and Rospatent started joint PPH-Mottainai program that is currently in force.


Sony Corporation fails to register “SxS” trademark in Russia

Created on Friday, 28 October 2011 14:32

In November 2010 Rospatent (official patenting body) refused registration of the brand name for the goods in class 9 (date storage devices). The company appealed to Patent Disputes Board claiming the name to be not merely a combination of letters, but a formula consisting of two variables and a multiplication sign. Moreover, this brand had been used for more than three years, individualizing flash cards for Sony professional video cameras. Trademarks “SxS PRO” and “SxS LITE” were successfully registered before.


A lawsuit was brought to Arbitrage Court of Samara region by Samara customs office accusing OOO “Companiya OLMI 2000” (registered in Smyshlyaevka village) of unfair use of Barbie trademark. The trademark holder and a maker of Barbie dolls, Mattel, participates in this case as a third person.


A drop in a logotype led to a lawsuit

Created on Friday, 30 September 2011 14:26

OAO Lukoil, the holder of ”ЛУКОЙЛ” trademark in classes from 1 to 42 filed a lawsuit to Novgorod Arbitrage court claiming OOO Luxoil Plus was using illegally a similar designation on its refueling stations. The trademark in question has a distinctive feature – a picture of drop of liquid in place of letter “O” – that was also used by the defendant. Later in year 2010 after the claimant’s C&D request the drop was replaced with “O”.


On 31 of January 2012, Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation rendered a decision that Serum Institute of India Ltd. does not infringe Combiotech’s patent for a recombinant hepatitis B vaccine. The suit was initiated in September 2009 and lasted for nearly three years


Rado Uhren AG, a maker of prestigious chronometers and wristwatches has won a case concerning RADO trademark over Holmrook Ltd (BVI). By judgment of Moscow Arbitration court Holmrook Ltd is banned from using ôradoö designation in an Internet domain name and obliged to pay a 50 thousand roubles (approx.USD 1600) retribution to Rado Uhren AG for an unfair usage of the trademark.


ptmg2010Our trademark attorney Olga Gribanova and trademark agent Polina Isaeva are coming to Pharmaceutical Trade Marks Group 81st Group Conference, which will take place in Athens, Greece from September 29 to October 1 2010.


Four of our patent attorneys: Maria Nilova, Mikhail Mozhaisky, Victor Lisovenko and Evgeny Enbert are coming to 42nd World Intellectual Property Congress 3-6 October 2010 PARIS.


Patentica Team Strengthened by Four Patent Attorneys

Created on Friday, 18 June 2010 16:05

Patentica is proud to announce that four of our employees have passed the patent attorney qualification exam successfully. We are expressing heartfelt congratulations to Olga Gribanova, Marina Karaldina, Evgeniy Enbert, and Victor Lisovenko and wish them further prosperity and a rise to eminence in the profession.

New address

Created on Monday, 11 January 2010 16:05


We are pleased to inform you that due to increased business activity we have moved our headquarters to a bigger office in the center of Saint-Petersburg.

Our new address is:
Our telephone and fax numbers are unchanged.

Yours fauthfully,

EU-Russia co-operation project makes headway

Created on Tuesday, 15 December 2009 16:05

Representatives of the Russian patent office (Rospatent), the European Commission and the European Patent Office (EPO) have agreed on a common approach and next steps in the implementation of an EU-funded project aimed at aligning the Russian and EU patent systems. In a first meeting under the project, held at Rospatent in Moscow, the three organisations decided on concrete activities to be taken over the course of the next year.