The door is closed for BIBI

Our client GRASCO LTDA. vehemently opposed the trademark registration application for BIBI (MIXED) filed by SILVIA ESPERANZA CRUZ SUAREZ, based on the preexisting registration of the VIVI trademark. During the trademark surveillance process we conduct for our clients, our dedicated Intellectual Property department identified the application for the BIBI (MIXED) trademark. This trademark was intended to identify products included in Class 30, which are closely related to the products in Class 29, to which our client’s VIVI trademark belongs.

GRASCO LTDA.’s opposition was carefully prepared and submitted, based on the clear partial reproduction of the previously registered VIVI trademark, where the only visible change was the substitution of the letter V with the letter B. However, this change was insufficient to eliminate the significant orthographic, phonetic, and visual similarities between the two conflicting signs. These similarities could cause consumer confusion, negatively impacting our client’s established brand.

In addition to the similarities between the trademarks, we emphasized the close relationship or connection between the products identified by each sign. Class 29 includes products such as meats, fish, preserved fruits and vegetables, dairy products, among others, while Class 30 covers products such as coffee, tea, rice, tapioca, sago, artificial coffee, flours, cereal preparations, bread, pastries, confectionery, ice cream, honey, molasses syrup, yeast, baking powder, salt, mustard, vinegar, sauces, spices, ice, etc. Given this proximity, the coexistence of the BIBI (MIXED) and VIVI trademarks could mislead consumers about the origin of the products.

Our team of intellectual property experts prepared a robust and detailed case file, supported by solid legal arguments and relevant evidence to demonstrate the potential confusion and harm that could result from the registration of the BIBI (MIXED) trademark. This preparation included comparative analyses of the trademarks, market studies, and an exhaustive presentation of the risks associated with potential trademark confusion.

The Superintendence of Industry and Commerce, after thoroughly reviewing the arguments and evidence presented, concluded that GRASCO LTDA.’s opposition was well-founded. The similarity between the trademarks and the connection between the products were sufficient to determine that the registration of the BIBI (MIXED) trademark could indeed cause consumer confusion and dilute the distinctiveness of the VIVI trademark.

As a result, the Superintendence of Industry and Commerce denied the registration of the BIBI (MIXED) trademark filed by SILVIA ESPERANZA CRUZ SUAREZ. This outcome represents a significant victory for our client, ensuring the continued protection of their trademark in the market and preventing potential commercial damage and consumer confusion.

At Triana, Uribe & Michelsen, we are deeply committed to defending our clients’ intellectual property rights. This case underscores the importance of constant vigilance and proactive defense of trademarks. Through our meticulous and detailed approach, we successfully safeguarded the interests of GRASCO LTDA., demonstrating once again our ability to handle complex legal challenges in the intellectual property field.

The favorable resolution in this case reinforces our clients’ confidence in our services and reaffirms our commitment to providing the highest quality legal advice and representation. We will continue to work diligently to protect and strengthen our clients’ positions in the market, successfully addressing any challenges that may arise.

The door is closed for BIBI