The Office first examines the application and, if it is accepted, publishes it in the Official Trademark Bulletin. A 2-month opposition period follows publication; if no opposition is filed, the certificate is issued. After the preliminary search we tell you the expected timeline for your file.

The official fee is the registration charge paid to the state and is the same whoever files. Our service fee covers making sure the application is not refused, that your brand is protected in the right classes, and that every deadline is tracked for 10 years.

The time to reply to an opposition is short and starts with the notification. If it is missed, your application may be lost. Send us the notification right away so we can review your file and prepare the reply in time.

You can oppose an application published in the bulletin within 2 months of publication (Industrial Property Law, Art. 18). Once this period passes, the similar mark may be registered and the remedy is usually a long court case.

Yes. Through the Madrid System you can request protection in several countries with a single application, or you can file directly with national offices. We decide the right route together based on your target markets.

No. In Türkiye, having a clearance search carried out before filing a trademark application is not a legal requirement. It is, however, recommended so that possible refusal and dispute risks can be assessed in advance.

No. The search provides a risk assessment based on accessible records and the information available on the date of the review. The final outcome of registration depends on TÜRKPATENT’s examination, any oppositions and the applicable legal conditions.

In some cases, yes. However, being in different Nice classes alone does not mean there will be no legal conflict between the marks. The similarity of the goods and services, the reputation of the marks and other legal conditions are assessed together.

The duration depends on the nature of the mark, the number of classes to be reviewed, the density of similar trademark records and whether the search is national or international in scope.

Both word marks and marks containing figurative and logo elements can be searched. Searches for visual marks may require different review methods.

Fees may vary depending on the scope of the search and the level of detail of the legal assessment requested. The scope of the service and the fee information can be set out before you proceed.

A positive search result does not mean that using or registering the mark is definitively without legal issues. The result should be assessed with its scope and any other existing rights in mind.

Yes, the shortened form customers use can also be included as a search input. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

The written form and its possible pronunciation in Turkey can be searched separately. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

You can provide the symbol version alongside the letter that customers would read it as. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

It is useful to include both joined and separated spellings in the same search file. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

Searching only the full form may miss records using the abbreviation on its own. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

Yes, you can describe the new product and provide the existing trademark sample in the same request. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

Keep the image and record link, and identify the element you consider similar. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

Send the complete list together with the terms relevant to your own product. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

You can add concrete information showing the relationship between the parties. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

Yes, share examples of the different written forms intended for commercial use. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

An unreadable image is not a sound basis for a detailed similarity assessment. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

Provide the combined sample and identify each business’s distinctive name separately. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

Yes, distinguish the permanent trademark element from the variable product description. This detail is considered alongside the full name and the intended products. A filing decision should not be based on name similarity alone without also checking the current status of the records found.

First, the sign to be filed and the goods or services to be protected are determined. The application is filed through TÜRKPATENT’s electronic filing system. The Office examines the application for formal requirements and absolute grounds for refusal. Applications found acceptable are published in the Official Trademark Bulletin. Once oppositions and other procedures are completed, the application moves on to registration.

The application requires the applicant’s identity or legal entity details, a specimen of the mark to be registered and a list of the goods or services for which the mark will be used. Additional information and documents may be requested depending on the application. Where the procedure is carried out by an attorney, a power of representation is required. At Kupon Patent, we review the necessary information and prepare your file.

The time needed to complete registration depends on the Office’s examination, whether the application has any deficiencies and whether third parties file oppositions. Applications that pass examination are published in the Official Trademark Bulletin. Oppositions may be filed within two months from the publication date. Oppositions or deficiencies can extend the overall time. We follow each stage of your application and keep you informed of developments.

No. You do not need to own a company to file a trademark application. Natural persons can also apply. Legal entities, that is companies and other relevant organisations, can also be applicants. The conditions set out in the law for persons and organisations entitled to apply must be met. Who will own the trademark should be decided with the structure of the business and future use plans in mind.

Yes. The name and logo elements can be filed together in a single mark specimen. Separate applications can also be filed for the word element alone or the figurative element alone. The scope of the application is assessed according to the specimen filed and the goods or services selected. Depending on how your business uses its brand, we consider options for protecting a word mark, a figurative mark or both together.

In Türkiye, a registered trademark is protected for ten years from the filing date. This term can be extended for further periods of ten years by completing the required renewal procedures. Renewal must be carried out within the legal time limits. Keeping track of protection terms is important for trademark owners to avoid the risk of losing their rights. At Kupon Patent, we also support trademark renewals and portfolio tracking.

A trademark application may be refused in whole or in part on the grounds for refusal set out in the law. The reasons for the refusal decision are examined and the appropriate legal route is assessed. Persons adversely affected by the Office’s decisions may file a reasoned appeal within two months from notification of the decision. The scope of the appeal and the arguments to be submitted should be prepared according to the ground for refusal. At Kupon Patent, we support you in assessing the decision and throughout the appeal process.

A trademark registered in Türkiye does not, on its own, provide protection in other countries. Businesses seeking protection abroad can consider national or regional filing routes in their target countries. The Madrid System makes it possible, under certain conditions, to request international registration in several countries. Protection, however, depends on the assessment of each country concerned. We review filing options according to your export goals.

State clearly that the manufacturer and trademark owner are different and identify the name used for sales. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

Whether the legal-form wording is part of the commercial use should be examined. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

Provide the actual versions together so the role of the date can be assessed. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

Distinguish the role of the main trademark from that of the series name using examples. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

Provide the name-change document together with the application record for review. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

Share the application number and your current contact details when requesting a record check. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

Explain the relationship between the sign used by the branch and the intended rights holder. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

The product description and the distinctive trademark name should not be treated as the same element. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

Submit the sound proposed for protection separately from the recording used in the advertisement. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

Yes, distinguish the products themselves from any services provided through the subscription. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

Describe the goods sold and the services provided through the app under separate headings. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

Yes, an actual example helps clarify the role of the trademark on the label. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

First clarify the legal identity of the applicant and the intended future ownership arrangements. The proposed application sample should be examined alongside actual commercial use. The scope of any action is assessed using the file records and the selected goods or services list.

Under the Industrial Property Law No. 6769 (SMK), a mark that has not been genuinely used in Türkiye without a valid reason within five years from the registration date, or whose use has been suspended for an uninterrupted period of five years, may be revoked. Use of the mark with different elements that do not alter its distinctive character, use solely for export purposes, and use by another person with the owner’s consent also count as use.

Since 10 January 2024, revocation requests for non-use have been filed with the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office (TÜRKPATENT). Before that date, the courts had jurisdiction over revocation; cases pending on that date are concluded by the courts. The request may be filed by interested parties with a legitimate interest in the revocation of the mark. It is directed against the person recorded in the register as the trademark owner or their legal successors.

If your application has been opposed on the ground of similarity to an earlier mark, and that mark had been registered for at least five years on the filing date of your application, you can ask the opponent to prove use of their mark. If the opponent cannot prove that they genuinely used the mark in Türkiye during the five years preceding your application, or that they had a valid reason for non-use, the opposition is rejected.

The strongest evidence is usually invoices, as they show the date, quantity and goods or services. Catalogues, price lists, product and packaging images, photographs of signage, and advertising and trade fair records support the invoices. According to TÜRKPATENT’s guidelines, the evidence should clearly show the nature, place, time and extent of use. General statements remain weak unless supported by concrete documents.

If genuine use of the mark begins after the five-year period has expired but before the revocation request is filed, the request is rejected. However, if use was started in anticipation of a revocation request, use within the three months preceding the request is disregarded. It is therefore important to carry out the investigation quickly and not to make the request known unnecessarily. We plan the timing according to your case.

Yes. If the mark is used only for some of the goods or services for which it is registered, revocation may be limited to the unused goods or services. This is called partial revocation. A revocation decision cannot be issued in a way that alters the mark as registered. In our investigation, we assess use separately for each good and service in order to define the scope of the request correctly.

The revocation request is served on the trademark owner. The owner submits their evidence and response to TÜRKPATENT within one month; upon request within this period, the Office grants an additional period of up to one month. The Office may request additional information and documents if it deems necessary. The decision is made on the file, based on the claims, the defence and the evidence. We also support trademark owners in compiling their evidence.

As a rule, a revocation decision takes effect from the date the revocation request was filed with TÜRKPATENT. Upon request, if it is accepted that the ground for revocation arose at an earlier date, it may be decided that the decision takes effect from that date. A final revocation decision is effective against everyone; the mark is removed from the register and this is published in the Bulletin.

Trademark value is not calculated with a single formula. Depending on the purpose of the valuation, the income, market or cost approach is used. A method frequently used in practice is relief from royalty: an appropriate licence rate is applied to the brand’s future sales and the resulting amounts are discounted to present value. The result depends on the sales forecasts, the chosen rate and the risk assumptions. That is why we show every assumption, with its reasoning, in the report.

A trademark valuation is generally needed when the mark is about to change hands or a right is to be created over it. The main cases are the sale or assignment of the mark, a licence agreement, a company merger or acquisition, and pledging the mark or providing it as security. Accounting entries, tax and internal planning, and calculating damages in trademark disputes may also require a valuation. The purpose directly affects the method to be used.

Yes. Under the Industrial Property Law No. 6769 (SMK), a trademark can be assigned independently of the business. The assignment may cover all or some of the goods and services for which the mark is registered. For the assignment agreement to be valid, it must be made in writing and notarised. Recording the assignment in the TÜRKPATENT (Turkish Patent and Trademark Office) register is also important; rights arising from transactions not recorded in the register cannot be asserted against third parties acting in good faith.

Yes. The Industrial Property Law expressly provides that industrial property rights may be pledged and provided as security. These transactions must be in writing and are recorded in the TÜRKPATENT register at the request of one of the parties. If they are not recorded, rights arising from the transaction cannot be asserted against third parties acting in good faith. In security arrangements, the value and legal status of the mark are usually examined together.

A trademark may be licensed for all or some of the goods and services for which it is registered. The licence may be exclusive, meaning granted to a single licensee only, or non-exclusive. The licence fee varies according to scope, term, territory, exclusivity and the brand’s market strength. By reviewing royalty rates in comparable licence transactions and the brand’s revenue potential, we prepare a basis you can use in negotiations.

When your mark is used without permission, lost profits can be calculated using one of the methods set out in the law. One of these is the licence fee the infringer would have had to pay had they used the mark under a licence agreement. The calculation takes into account factors such as the economic importance of the mark, the number, term and type of licences, and the nature of the infringement. At this point, a trademark valuation can strengthen the basis of the claim.

Yes, it can. The provisions of the law on legal transactions such as assignment, licensing and pledge also apply to trademark applications. However, a mark whose registration process is not complete faces the possibility of opposition or refusal. This uncertainty is a risk factor that directly affects value. In the valuation, we review the stage of the application, any oppositions and similar marks, and show this risk clearly in the report.

No. A trademark valuation report is an expert opinion prepared for a specific date and purpose. The result relies on the data used, the method chosen and the assumptions. When market conditions change, the value may change too. The transaction price is set by the parties, and in disputes by the court. In some transactions the report may need to be prepared by certain authorised persons; we assess this need with you from the outset.

Prepare product and sales records that allow revenue to be separated by trademark. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

A breakdown showing seasonal changes should be examined alongside the total. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

Demand attributable to the trademark should be separated from the business’s existing customer relationships. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

Yes, identify the campaign period and the related sales records separately. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

Distributor sales and the limits of the available end-customer information can be stated separately. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

Revenue from continuing products and discontinued products should be considered separately. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

The basis and scope of the licensing income are key; relevant sales records may also be examined. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

Other commercial factors should be separated rather than attributing the entire increase to the name change. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

No, verified developments that may affect commercial perception should also be disclosed. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

Different valuation purposes, dates and assumptions can produce different results. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

Markets supported by data should be separated from those based on future assumptions. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

Yes, identify the documents supporting the usage arrangement and state any gaps clearly. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

Account performance and the economic contribution of the trademark should be examined separately. The valuation should clearly identify the period and trademark to which this information relates. Separating the supporting evidence prevents assumptions from being confused with verified data.

Trademark watching is the regular monitoring of new applications published in the Official Trademark Bulletin by comparing them with your mark. TÜRKPATENT mostly examines relative grounds for refusal, such as likelihood of confusion with earlier marks, not on its own initiative but upon opposition. It is therefore up to the trademark owner to notice a similar application and oppose it in time. At Kupon Patent we carry out this monitoring on your behalf.

The Official Trademark Bulletin is the official publication announcing trademark applications that have passed examination on formal requirements and absolute grounds for refusal. It is published electronically by TÜRKPATENT and can be accessed on the Office’s website. The Bulletin is published twice a month, in 24 issues per year. Our watching service screens every new issue.

An opposition against a trademark application published in the Bulletin can be filed within two months from the publication date. The opposition is filed with the Office in writing and with reasons. If the reasons are not submitted within this period, the opposition is deemed not to have been filed. The official opposition fee must also be paid within the same period and the payment notified to the Office. Because the period is short, it is important to detect similar applications early.

The law provides that oppositions against publication may be filed by interested parties. In oppositions based on similarity and likelihood of confusion, this is usually the owner of an earlier mark or right. Apart from that, anyone may submit observations to the Office that the application cannot be registered on absolute grounds for refusal; however, the person submitting observations does not become a party to the proceedings.

Two elements are considered together: whether the signs are identical or similar, and whether the goods and services covered are identical or similar. If these similarities create a likelihood of confusion, including the likelihood that the public will associate the two marks, the application is refused upon opposition. Spelling, pronunciation, meaning and visual impression are decisive in this assessment. We prepare our reports according to these criteria.

Well-known marks enjoy broader protection under the law. Where, because of the reputation a mark has reached in Türkiye, an application could take unfair advantage of it, harm its reputation or impair its distinctiveness, oppositions can also be filed against applications for different goods and services. For this reason, when watching well-known marks we cover applications in other classes too, not only your own class.

Once the two-month opposition period has passed, the route of opposing the publication is closed and the application may proceed to registration. In that case, interested parties may ask the court to invalidate the mark if the conditions in the law are met. However, court proceedings take longer and cost more than an opposition. In addition, a trademark owner who has knowingly tolerated the use of a later mark for five years generally cannot request invalidation.

Yes. The watch scope can be extended according to the countries where your mark is protected or where you do business. International applications filed through the Madrid System are published by WIPO. European Union trademark applications are announced by EUIPO. Since each country’s opposition period and procedure may differ, we determine the deadlines for watching abroad separately according to the rules of the country concerned.

Update the notification recipients and the list of authorized contacts. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

It is useful to keep a traceable record of each alert’s assessment and supporting grounds. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

Use the application number to distinguish a repeated notification from a new development. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

Examine the image published at the report date alongside the current register entry. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

Identify actual commercial use separately from the goods covered by the registration. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

You can add examples of pronunciations encountered in use to the monitoring scope. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

Recording the reasoning helps maintain consistency when reviewing later similar alerts. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

Assess the similarity to each trademark separately within the same record. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

Yes, the ownership change can be added to the history with the relevant register information. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

Highlight the relevant terms separately and link them to your trademark’s coverage. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

Separate case-specific assessments and personal contact details according to the sharing purpose. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

Record the responsible person, review status and latest action for each alert. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

Consider the old version’s continuing use and registration status before removing it from scope. The relevant application, publication details and reason for notification are kept together in the monitoring record. An alert prompts a file review; it does not by itself determine whether legal action should be taken.

A good brand name starts with understanding your business. First we clarify your field of activity, your target audience and the impression you want the brand to give. Then we generate name candidates using different approaches. We assess each candidate against the grounds for refusal in the SMK, screen for similar marks, and present the names that remain to you together with a class plan. You make the final choice.

It is often difficult. Under SMK Art. 5, signs consisting solely or essentially of expressions indicating the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value or geographical origin of the goods are not registered. If such a name has acquired distinctiveness through use before the application, it cannot be refused on this ground; proving this, however, is a separate matter. This is why we propose more original names from the start.

Distinctiveness is a mark’s ability to distinguish your goods or services from those of other businesses. SMK Art. 4 treats this as the basic requirement of a trademark, and Art. 5 states that signs lacking distinctive character are not registered. Invented words and names with no direct connection to the product are usually stronger. Names that merely describe the product remain weak.

It depends. Names identical to, or so similar as to be indistinguishable from, a mark registered or applied for earlier for identical or same-type goods are refused during TÜRKPATENT’s examination. Similar names that carry a likelihood of confusion may be refused upon opposition by the earlier mark owner. An opposition is filed within two months from publication of the application in the Bulletin. This is why we screen candidates in advance.

No, no adviser can say this with certainty. TÜRKPATENT makes the registration decision, and third parties may also file oppositions after publication. Our job is to make known risks visible before filing. We eliminate candidates that look weak in terms of grounds for refusal and similar records, and present the remaining candidates to you with reasoned notes. This allows you to make a more informed decision.

No. Under the SMK, trademark protection is obtained through registration. Acquiring a domain name or username does not give you a trademark right. Conversely, using a name identical or similar to a registered trademark as a domain name in a way that has a commercial effect online may infringe that trademark right. We therefore recommend checking the availability of domain and account names for your candidates and planning registration separately.

Yes. SMK Art. 4 lists personal names among the signs that can constitute a trademark. However, like any other sign, the name must be distinctive and must not conflict with earlier marks. An application containing another person’s name may be refused upon opposition by the right holder. Since common surnames may carry a higher risk of similar records, we particularly recommend a preliminary search.

A trademark is protected for the goods and services selected in the application. These are determined according to the international classification based on the Nice Agreement. In the similarity examination, the identity or similarity of the goods and services is taken into account alongside the names. A name may therefore be unproblematic in one class but risky in another. We prepare a class plan taking into account both your current business and your growth plans.

Small usage trials can examine how people write down and read back a proposed name. During name development, this criterion is considered alongside the product’s audience and intended uses. After the creative selection, the candidate must also be checked against trademark records.

Define the preferred spelling in each language and identify the shared trademark element. During name development, this criterion is considered alongside the product’s audience and intended uses. After the creative selection, the candidate must also be checked against trademark records.

A repeatable naming structure can connect the main trademark and series names. During name development, this criterion is considered alongside the product’s audience and intended uses. After the creative selection, the candidate must also be checked against trademark records.

Spoken clarity and similar-sounding words deserve additional attention in this context. During name development, this criterion is considered alongside the product’s audience and intended uses. After the creative selection, the candidate must also be checked against trademark records.

Yes, test examples in the narrow screens and list fields where the name will appear. During name development, this criterion is considered alongside the product’s audience and intended uses. After the creative selection, the candidate must also be checked against trademark records.

Examine how customers would read and understand the code. During name development, this criterion is considered alongside the product’s audience and intended uses. After the creative selection, the candidate must also be checked against trademark records.

Yes, include the abbreviation’s resulting meaning and usage context in the assessment. During name development, this criterion is considered alongside the product’s audience and intended uses. After the creative selection, the candidate must also be checked against trademark records.

Plan their relationship to the main trademark and how customers will understand that structure. During name development, this criterion is considered alongside the product’s audience and intended uses. After the creative selection, the candidate must also be checked against trademark records.

Try the candidate name with the planned product categories to examine its meaning limits. During name development, this criterion is considered alongside the product’s audience and intended uses. After the creative selection, the candidate must also be checked against trademark records.

Yes, a sample at actual packaging size can show the effect on readability. During name development, this criterion is considered alongside the product’s audience and intended uses. After the creative selection, the candidate must also be checked against trademark records.

Audience, usage sample, pronunciation and search status can be compared in the same table. During name development, this criterion is considered alongside the product’s audience and intended uses. After the creative selection, the candidate must also be checked against trademark records.

Keeping the reasons reduces repeated discussion of the same candidates and confusion over decisions. During name development, this criterion is considered alongside the product’s audience and intended uses. After the creative selection, the candidate must also be checked against trademark records.

An application published in the Official Trademark Bulletin can be opposed within two months from the publication date. The grounds of opposition and confirmation that the official fee has been paid must also be submitted to the Office within this period. If the grounds are not submitted in time, the opposition is deemed not to have been filed. After the period has passed, longer and more costly routes, such as an invalidation action, may come into play for the same purpose.

The law states that oppositions may be filed by interested parties. Oppositions based on relative grounds for refusal, such as similarity, reputation, trade names or copyright, are usually filed by the owner of the earlier right. Absolute grounds for refusal, such as descriptive or misleading signs, may also be the subject of an opposition. We determine which right to rely on and in whose name to file the opposition according to your file.

The most common ground is similarity to an earlier mark and the resulting likelihood of confusion. In addition, taking unfair advantage of the reputation of a well-known mark, an earlier unregistered sign used in trade, another person’s name, trade name or copyright, and a bad-faith application may also be grounds for opposition. Supporting the grounds with evidence is decisive in how the opposition is assessed.

If the opponent relies on a mark that has been registered for at least five years, the applicant may request proof that the mark has been put to genuine use in Türkiye during the last five years. If the opponent cannot prove use, or a proper reason for non-use, the opposition is rejected. If use is proven only for some of the goods or services, the examination is limited to those.

YİDK is the Re-examination and Evaluation Board within TÜRKPATENT. A party adversely affected by a decision, such as the refusal of an application or the rejection of an opposition, files a written, reasoned appeal within two months from notification of the decision. The grounds must be submitted within this period; no new grounds can be added once it has passed. At the end of its examination, the Board issues the Office’s final decision.

Yes. An action for annulment can be brought against the Office’s final decision. The competent court is the Ankara Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights Civil Court. In practice, the action is filed within two months from notification of the decision. Before you decide to go to court, we review the YİDK reasoning, the state of the evidence and the strengths of the file together with you.

If the examination shows that the application cannot be registered for some goods or services, the application is refused to that extent; if it is found unsuitable for all of them, it is refused in full. Otherwise, the opposition is rejected and the application proceeds. The parties may also settle with the Office’s encouragement. After the decision, the YİDK appeal and court action routes remain open to both parties.

Record its source and any available date information separately. The application file, the parties’ grounds and the content of the relevant documents are examined together. This detail alone does not determine acceptance or rejection; the individual file requires assessment.

Provide product and usage examples explaining the link between the abbreviation and the trademark. The application file, the parties’ grounds and the content of the relevant documents are examined together. This detail alone does not determine acceptance or rejection; the individual file requires assessment.

Clearly identify the relevant goods and the grounds for including them in the dispute. The application file, the parties’ grounds and the content of the relevant documents are examined together. This detail alone does not determine acceptance or rejection; the individual file requires assessment.

Yes, explain the supporting basis for the relationship between the document holders and the rights holder. The application file, the parties’ grounds and the content of the relevant documents are examined together. This detail alone does not determine acceptance or rejection; the individual file requires assessment.

Keep the original messages, their dates and the context of the conversation. The application file, the parties’ grounds and the content of the relevant documents are examined together. This detail alone does not determine acceptance or rejection; the individual file requires assessment.

Identify the sections supporting the alleged facts and their place within the complete document. The application file, the parties’ grounds and the content of the relevant documents are examined together. This detail alone does not determine acceptance or rejection; the individual file requires assessment.

Add records linking the product codes to the commercial products. The application file, the parties’ grounds and the content of the relevant documents are examined together. This detail alone does not determine acceptance or rejection; the individual file requires assessment.

The relationship between the ownership change and authority to act needs a file-specific review. The application file, the parties’ grounds and the content of the relevant documents are examined together. This detail alone does not determine acceptance or rejection; the individual file requires assessment.

Yes, explain the specific fact supported by each piece of correspondence. The application file, the parties’ grounds and the content of the relevant documents are examined together. This detail alone does not determine acceptance or rejection; the individual file requires assessment.

Disclose that it is incomplete and preserve the source information for the available pages. The application file, the parties’ grounds and the content of the relevant documents are examined together. This detail alone does not determine acceptance or rejection; the individual file requires assessment.

The earlier decision’s subject matter and its connection to the current case can be examined. The application file, the parties’ grounds and the content of the relevant documents are examined together. This detail alone does not determine acceptance or rejection; the individual file requires assessment.

Preserve the original document reference and cross-reference duplicates in an evidence list. The application file, the parties’ grounds and the content of the relevant documents are examined together. This detail alone does not determine acceptance or rejection; the individual file requires assessment.

A registered trademark is protected for ten years from the filing date and is renewed for successive ten-year periods. The renewal request is filed within the six months before the protection period expires, and confirmation that the renewal fee has been paid is submitted to the Office within the same period. The renewal takes effect from the day after the previous period ends. We enter these dates in the calendar in advance for every mark in your portfolio.

If the normal renewal period has been missed, a renewal request can be filed within six months from the date the protection period ended, on payment of an additional fee. If this grace period also passes, protection of the mark ends. Protecting the same sign again may require a new application, which is subject to examination and opposition procedures from the beginning. For this reason, in portfolio tracking we aim to start the procedure before the grace period is needed.

A trademark can be assigned for all or some of the goods or services for which it is registered. The assignment agreement must be in writing and notarised; otherwise it is not valid. The assignment is recorded in the register at the request of either party and published in the Bulletin. Rights arising from a transaction not recorded in the register cannot be asserted against third parties acting in good faith. We assist with preparing the assignment documents and with the recordal request.

A trademark may be the subject of a licence agreement for all or some of the goods or services covered by the registration. Unless the agreement states otherwise, the licence is non-exclusive, meaning the owner may also grant licences to others. The licence is made in writing and recorded in the register at the request of either party. Rights arising from an unrecorded licence cannot be asserted against third parties acting in good faith; for collective marks, a licence is valid only once recorded in the register.

When the right holder’s name or legal form changes, the register is updated by submitting a request form together with the Turkish Trade Registry Gazette details or document showing the change. A change of address is also recorded with a request form. This entry applies to all applications and registrations recorded in the right holder’s name. Outdated register details may mean that Office correspondence and deadline notices do not reach you.

Yes. A mark that has not been put to genuine use in Türkiye within five years of registration without a proper reason, or whose use has been suspended for an uninterrupted period of five years, may be revoked upon request. Since 10 January 2024 this decision has been made by TÜRKPATENT. Use of the mark solely for export and use with the owner’s consent also count as use. In the portfolio report we separately flag the status of evidence of use.

Yes. A mark can also be renewed for part of the goods or services covered by the registration. A partial renewal request states the class numbers of the goods or services to be renewed; if other right holders are recorded in the register, their declaration of consent is also required. A duly filed request is recorded in the register and published in the Bulletin. We assess together, based on your activities, which classes should remain protected.

Yes. International registrations obtained through the Madrid System, European Union trademarks and national registrations in individual countries are also added to your portfolio list. Each system has different renewal dates and recordal procedures; for example, Madrid registrations are renewed through WIPO. We show these differences in a single calendar and, where needed, carry out procedures abroad together with authorised attorneys in the country concerned.

Match the application and registration numbers against the register to reconcile the entries. The portfolio record keeps the transaction history, relevant documents and responsible person together. This makes it possible to track the commercial decision separately from any action needed in the register.

Check ownership and document completeness before transferring files to the corporate archive through authorized access. The portfolio record keeps the transaction history, relevant documents and responsible person together. This makes it possible to track the commercial decision separately from any action needed in the register.

Keep the contractual goods scope linked to the relevant trademark record. The portfolio record keeps the transaction history, relevant documents and responsible person together. This makes it possible to track the commercial decision separately from any action needed in the register.

Match each image to its application and period of use. The portfolio record keeps the transaction history, relevant documents and responsible person together. This makes it possible to track the commercial decision separately from any action needed in the register.

Show legal ownership separately from usage relationships within the group. The portfolio record keeps the transaction history, relevant documents and responsible person together. This makes it possible to track the commercial decision separately from any action needed in the register.

Record the contractual position separately from the current register status. The portfolio record keeps the transaction history, relevant documents and responsible person together. This makes it possible to track the commercial decision separately from any action needed in the register.

Keep the registered coverage intact and show actual use in a separate field. The portfolio record keeps the transaction history, relevant documents and responsible person together. This makes it possible to track the commercial decision separately from any action needed in the register.

Keep the historical documents and identify the current status separately. The portfolio record keeps the transaction history, relevant documents and responsible person together. This makes it possible to track the commercial decision separately from any action needed in the register.

First examine the register entries together with the existing agreements. The portfolio record keeps the transaction history, relevant documents and responsible person together. This makes it possible to track the commercial decision separately from any action needed in the register.

Identify the copy’s source and clearly mark the supporting documents that are missing. The portfolio record keeps the transaction history, relevant documents and responsible person together. This makes it possible to track the commercial decision separately from any action needed in the register.

Keep licence coverage and country-specific rights status in linked but separate fields. The portfolio record keeps the transaction history, relevant documents and responsible person together. This makes it possible to track the commercial decision separately from any action needed in the register.

Transfer the current case status, action history and outstanding notices to the authorized person. The portfolio record keeps the transaction history, relevant documents and responsible person together. This makes it possible to track the commercial decision separately from any action needed in the register.

Trademark infringement is the commercial use of a registered trademark, or of a sign similar enough to be confused with it, without the trademark owner’s permission. Use for identical or similar goods and services, selling, importing or stocking counterfeit products, and exceeding licence limits all fall within this scope. Using the sign as a domain name, keyword or trade name may also constitute infringement.

Trademark protection under the Industrial Property Law is obtained through registration. The trademark must also be registered in Türkiye to pursue the criminal route. For unregistered signs, the situation may be assessed case by case, for example under the unfair competition provisions of the Turkish Commercial Code. In such a case, we both examine the existing use and recommend filing a registration application for your trademark without delay.

A cease-and-desist letter is a common way to notify the other party of the infringement and request that the use stop. Many disputes can end at this stage; however, it may not be suitable in every case. For example, if there is a risk that evidence will be destroyed, evidence preservation or an interim injunction may be considered first. The steps required before a lawsuit vary with the type of claim; we plan them together in cooperation with a lawyer.

Claims for compensation are subject to the limitation provisions of the Turkish Code of Obligations: the general rule is two years from learning of the damage and the person responsible, and in any event ten years from the act. If the act constitutes a criminal offence and the criminal limitation period is longer, that period may apply. In the criminal route, the complaint must be filed within six months of learning of the act and the offender. Because the starting point of these periods may be disputed depending on the case, acting early is important.

A person entitled to bring an action may request an interim injunction from the court by proving that the infringing use is continuing in Türkiye or that serious and effective preparations are being made for it. The injunction may include measures such as preventing and stopping the infringement, seizing counterfeit products and security. The decision is made by the court. Since the strength of the request depends largely on the evidence, we prepare the evidence file with care.

Damage covers actual loss and loss of profit. Loss of profit is calculated by one of three methods, at the right holder’s choice: the probable income that would have been earned without the infringement, the net profit made by the infringer, or the licence fee that would have been paid under a lawful licence. If the reputation of the trademark has been harmed, additional compensation may be claimed. The amount is determined by the court; the method to be chosen should be assessed in light of the evidence.

Unauthorised use of a trademark on the internet as a domain name, routing code or keyword in a way that creates a commercial effect is listed in the law among the forms of infringement. For marketplace listings and social media accounts, we first record evidence with screenshots, links and dates. We then assess with you the platform’s rights infringement reporting procedures, a cease-and-desist letter or court action.

We first examine the registration scope and date of the trademark on which the claim is based. Having your own registration is not, on its own, a defence against an earlier right. If the other party has not genuinely used its trademark for five years, this may be raised as a defence in the lawsuit. If necessary, an action for a declaration that your use does not constitute infringement may also be assessed in cooperation with a lawyer.

Present follower counts separately from commercial use and consumer reach. The evidence should explain which trademark, period and consumer group it concerns. Recognition is not assessed from a single figure; the other evidence in the file must also be considered.

Distinguish company visibility from visibility relating to the trademark itself. The evidence should explain which trademark, period and consumer group it concerns. Recognition is not assessed from a single figure; the other evidence in the file must also be considered.

Yes, explain the consumer or professional group to which the evidence relates. The evidence should explain which trademark, period and consumer group it concerns. Recognition is not assessed from a single figure; the other evidence in the file must also be considered.

Identify the placement and visibility of your own trademark within the campaign. The evidence should explain which trademark, period and consumer group it concerns. Recognition is not assessed from a single figure; the other evidence in the file must also be considered.

Yes, keep evidence of reach to the relevant audience in Turkey separately. The evidence should explain which trademark, period and consumer group it concerns. Recognition is not assessed from a single figure; the other evidence in the file must also be considered.

Include documents showing that the award-winning product was offered under the relevant trademark. The evidence should explain which trademark, period and consumer group it concerns. Recognition is not assessed from a single figure; the other evidence in the file must also be considered.

Distinguish the existence of the content from evidence that it was published or broadcast. The evidence should explain which trademark, period and consumer group it concerns. Recognition is not assessed from a single figure; the other evidence in the file must also be considered.

Yes, examine how the participants relate to the relevant consumer group. The evidence should explain which trademark, period and consumer group it concerns. Recognition is not assessed from a single figure; the other evidence in the file must also be considered.

Yes, documents can explain continuity of use between the old and new versions. The evidence should explain which trademark, period and consumer group it concerns. Recognition is not assessed from a single figure; the other evidence in the file must also be considered.

Separate posts relating to your trademark from other uses of the word. The evidence should explain which trademark, period and consumer group it concerns. Recognition is not assessed from a single figure; the other evidence in the file must also be considered.

Explain your trademark’s visibility and the dealership relationship separately. The evidence should explain which trademark, period and consumer group it concerns. Recognition is not assessed from a single figure; the other evidence in the file must also be considered.

Examine the period represented by the data and its relationship to the current position. The evidence should explain which trademark, period and consumer group it concerns. Recognition is not assessed from a single figure; the other evidence in the file must also be considered.

Commissioning a private preliminary search before filing is generally not mandatory. It can, however, strengthen your filing strategy. Official search procedures are a separate stage of the patent application process.

No. A preliminary search does not replace the official search and examination; there are unpublished applications and limitations relating to the scope of the search.

It can help with an initial screening. Critical findings should be verified against official office records and other technical sources.

No. FTO examines the risks that can be identified for a specific product, country and date; it does not show that there is no risk at all.

Owning a patent does not mean that you are not infringing patents belonging to third parties. FTO should be assessed separately.

No. Patent protection is territorial. A separate analysis is needed for the target countries.

No. Because of scope and accessibility limitations, not finding a document is not conclusive proof of novelty.

Yes. Depending on the search question and the country, utility model documents may be important.

A technical description, drawings and the distinguishing features; for FTO, the concrete version of the product and information on the target market.

An update may be needed as new applications are published, as the product changes or as the target market expands.

Explain the technical problem it solves and how it works, rather than only its commercial name. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

Compare the technical relationships in the specification and claims alongside the drawing. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

Even within a patent family, the claims of each document must be examined separately. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

Record the source and public availability date of a manual containing technical disclosure. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

Record the video’s content separately from evidence supporting when it became publicly accessible. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

Compare product structure and process steps under separate technical headings. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

Known former names and merger information can be included as search inputs. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

Examine the relevant passage in its original language and technical context. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

Identify the shared technical feature separately from features not disclosed in that document. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

Technical features, manufacturer details and the product description can provide a starting point. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

A document should not be excluded simply because it concerns another industry. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

It is useful to provide separate versions with their changed technical features marked. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

Clearly separate verified information from missing action records. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

Yes, clearly state that the annexes were unavailable for assessment. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

List equivalent technical terms together with the alternatives used in the industry. The search notes keep the document identifier, relevant technical disclosure and date information together. A single abstract or search result does not replace a technical comparison and a legal status review.

Not for every invention; drawings should be submitted where they are needed for the technical disclosure.

They must meet the legibility and formal requirements of the office concerned.

The office’s current rules and the specific technical need should be assessed.

Yes, if a sufficient technical description and a draft are available.

Within the limits allowed by the legislation; no new technical matter should be added.

The scope of protection is determined by the claims; drawings are taken into account in interpretation.

Adaptation may be needed according to the requirements of the target offices.

It varies with the complexity of the invention and the need for revisions.

An additional view or section can clarify the connection. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

A sectional or exploded view can make the internal structure understandable. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

Use consistent names and reference signs for that part across the figures. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

Show the movement relationship with appropriate signs and accompanying specification text. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

Commercial decoration that does not explain the technical solution can be separated during preparation. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

Prepare separate views if the technical difference between the positions is not clear. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

Review readability at the final submission size. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

First establish the actual technical sequence, then make the text and diagram consistent with it. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

Clearly distinguish the connection types so the system relationships remain understandable. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

Adjust the section representation to clarify its technical meaning. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

Any symmetry important to the technical explanation should be shown clearly. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

Yes, keep editable source files matched to the submitted version. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

Identify structural changes between versions through a separate technical comparison. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

Explain whether the dimension is essential to the solution or merely an example. The figures should be consistent with the descriptions and part names in the specification. The purpose of the drawings is to explain the invention’s technical relationships clearly rather than promote the product.

Clearly describe the new connection and the technical relationship between the components. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

Show specifically how the size change relates to the structural solution. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

Provide the mechanism’s components, connections and operating principle together. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

Describe the mechanical structure separately from the operations performed by the software. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

Show the shared structure alongside the adaptations specific to each machine. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

Explain the actual technical structure and relationships that produce those advantages. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

Explain the dismantling and assembly relationship if it contributes to the technical solution. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

Provide drawings of the earlier and later structures with records showing the technical change. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

Explain how the parts connect and how this affects operation. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

A technical file explaining the structure separately from the commercial catalogue is useful. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

Distinguish the earlier technical source from the structure you added. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

Describe the common technical structure separately from the variable elements. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

Describe appearance choices separately from the technical structure responsible for function. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

Compare the disclosed features of the earlier product with the new solution’s actual differences. The assessment considers the product’s actual structure together with earlier technical disclosures. The suitability of the filing route depends on the technical subject disclosed in the specification and claims, rather than the product’s commercial name.

It is the regular search of published information on competitors, technical fields and patents.

It is carried out to support decisions by tracking technological developments and important patent activity.

No. A search focuses on a question at a given date, whereas watching focuses on ongoing change.

No. Infringement and FTO assessments require separate technical and legal analysis.

No. Unpublished applications cannot be seen in general patent databases.

Countries covered by the data sources can be watched; the level of detail and how up to date the data is vary by country.

Weekly, monthly or other intervals can be set according to your needs.

No. Businesses engaged in R&D and manufacturing can also use the service.

It may contain new publications, patent families, changes in legal status and follow-up recommendations.

No. Publication and grant of a patent are different stages.

No. Protection depends on national or regional procedures.

Critical findings require expert review.

It is determined by the scope, the number of countries, the interval and the depth of analysis.

The valid claims are compared with the technical elements of the product or process.

No; the scope of the claims and the specific act are decisive.

Yes, a patent is not a permission for commercial use.

No, the limits of the search scope and the uncertainties remain.

The date of the act and the status of the right on that date are examined.

It varies with the technical scope, access to evidence and the number of patents.

It is not a formal requirement in every case, but it is useful for a systematic technical comparison.

It is a technical element that differs from the claim element but may be assessed as equivalent under the statutory criteria.

No, it is a technical and legal assessment document.

The strategy should be decided after the evidence and legal risks have been assessed.

It is the systematic legal, technical, financial and strategic management of patents and applications.

All files are entered into an inventory, patent families are linked and the official register status is verified.

In Türkiye, annual fees arise from the second year onwards; specific dates are checked against current regulations.

Non-payment of fees can lead to the right lapsing; any grace period and conditions for reinstatement of rights are reviewed separately.

No. The decision should be made after assessing the commercial, technical, legal and contractual implications.

No. It is an international filing mechanism; separate procedures are required in the relevant countries.

No. FTO examines the risks from third-party patents for specific products and countries.

It can be licensed within the framework of suitable rights and contractual terms.

It helps identify unnecessary spending; however, the main aim is to manage the budget without losing critical protection.

There is no fixed number; alignment with commercial goals and the quality of protection are what matter.

Critical dates should be monitored continuously, and strategic reviews should be carried out periodically according to the business’s needs.

No. Monitoring focuses on new publications and status changes, while portfolio management covers the entire protection strategy.

Keep each country document as a separate record while preserving the family connection. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Link the patent record to product codes and relevant technical features. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Link the contractual scope to the relevant document version and claims. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Check the co-owner’s current legal identity together with the register entry. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Add the responsible representative and action history to each country record. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Show actual product use separately from ongoing commercial discussions. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Separate the documents to be shared according to the access purpose and confidentiality scope. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Connect the parent, divisional files and country information through reciprocal references. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Record the product connection, claim scope and technical opinion together. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Show missing documents separately from verified action information. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Record the patent right separately from the contractual transfer of technical information. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Show each country record’s status rather than assigning a single label to the entire family. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Confidential developments can be linked to patent files through separate access-restricted records. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

The match should also be checked by the technical team against the document’s scope. The inventory records the document number, country, current status and relevant commercial connection together. Decisions are not based on document counts alone; protection scope and business use are also examined.

Yes, but uncertainty about grant and scope is taken into account.

No, a patent is only one of the company’s assets.

No, it is an estimate based on assumptions.

Yes, it changes with market and legal conditions.

It depends on the specific dispute and the procedural conditions.

Yes, but shared income must not be counted twice.

It depends on the scope and the quality of the data.

Prepare revenue and expense records that can be separated by product. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Separate the contractual consideration for rights use from that for support services. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Document the relationship between the rights holder and the company earning the revenue. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Yes, disclose changes affecting the product’s relationship to the patent scope. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Check the actual rights status and review the accounting inconsistency with your accountant. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Clarify the identities of the rights and their connection to the contractual revenue. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Match the relevant agreement, invoices and payment records. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Explain the parties to the transaction and their relationship in the tax review file. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Yes, show the country-specific rights status in relation to the relevant transaction. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Separate the different transferred assets in the agreement and financial records. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Prepare the agreement supporting the allocation and the relevant period records together. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Production records may help explain the product-to-right connection and revenue allocation. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Prepare a mapping that identifies the document and explains the relevant product feature. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

No, retain the evidence for each period and record the current status separately. The patent file and financial records are checked to ensure that they concern the same transaction and right. The tax treatment must be assessed with an accountant using current rules and the actual records.

Attendance and technical contribution to the invention should not be treated as the same thing. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Use specific records to explain the testing scope and its effect on developing the technical solution. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Show each person’s role, contractual relationship and technical contribution separately. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Preserve existing correspondence and versions, and collect specific accounts of participants’ contributions. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Check its content, receipt date and whether it reached the authorized person. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Record each employee’s employment relationship and development role separately. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Review earlier knowledge, the new contribution and confidentiality relationships separately. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Record received documents separately from later requests for additional material, with their dates. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Define the presentation’s confidentiality scope and authorized audience. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Record the notebooks’ identities, content scope and handover status. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Link the identity change to the existing invention record using supporting documentation. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Document the pre-employment development separately from the new work scope. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Hand over the disclosures, supporting documents and previous decisions file by file. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

Explain the project scope, resources used and development stages separately. The nature of the contribution, the working relationship and the relevant documents are examined together. Creating a record does not by itself settle ownership; the parties’ positions depend on the actual working circumstances.

No. Both natural persons and legal entities can file patent applications. Who holds the right to file is determined by the particular circumstances of the case.

Yes. In Türkiye, patent applications can be filed through TÜRKPATENT’s electronic filing system.

Abstract ideas alone do not benefit from patent protection. The idea must have become a patentable technical invention and meet the legal conditions.

Yes. A physically built prototype is not a general requirement for a patent application. However, the technical description of the invention must be sufficient and its applicability must be demonstrable.

Filing an application does not in itself prohibit selling the product. Nevertheless, whether the product infringes rights held by third parties and any sector-specific authorisation requirements should be examined separately.

Depending on the grounds for refusal and the procedural stage, the opposition or judicial remedies provided for in the legislation can be considered. In every case, the nature of the decision and the applicable time limits are important.

No. Patent rights are territorial. Protection obtained in Türkiye does not automatically apply in other countries.

The term of protection of a granted patent is 20 years from the filing date. Legal protection during the application stage and the ability to enforce rights are subject to separate conditions.

There are legal limitations on obtaining both patent and utility model protection for the same invention. The appropriate filing or conversion strategy should be assessed on the basis of the specific file.

For applicants resident in Türkiye, representation by a patent attorney is generally not mandatory. Nevertheless, professional support is important for drafting the claims, ensuring a sufficient technical disclosure and managing procedural deadlines.

Separate features essential to the technical solution from dimensions that may vary. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

Explaining its technical properties is clearer than providing only a trade name. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

No, disclose conflicting results and experimental conditions when assessing the invention’s effect. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

Distinguish an explainable technical basis from an unverified expectation. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

Clearly show how the off-the-shelf components relate to your own technical solution. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

The terms used for the same part should be made consistent. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

Earlier trials can help explain the technical problem and the development of the solution. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

Provide the technical information needed to explain how they work together. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

Stating only the desired result may not adequately disclose the technical solution. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

A technical title describing the invention’s subject is more informative for examination. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

Describe the basic technical structure separately from preferred implementation details. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

Explain the shared and differing technical relationships in each operating mode. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

Review the drafts for consistency while preserving contribution and version information. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

Yes, new results affecting the technical basis should be included in the file review. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

Identify the submitted file, the correct version and their technical differences clearly. The technical disclosure and the application documents should be consistent. Decisions about the file are made by examining the original submission and the features actually disclosed in the invention.

Companies developing products, start-ups, design owners and organisations that manage their rights commercially can benefit from it.

The time depends on the number of files, the target countries, the scope of the search and any official procedures.

Product images, any application or registration numbers, relevant contracts and information on target markets are useful to start with.

International coverage can be defined separately; each country has different legal and database conditions.

No. The review is based on the available documents and the defined scope; it does not determine in advance the decision of administrative or judicial authorities.

A quote is prepared after considering the number of files, technical complexity, number of countries, level of report detail and official fees.

Add functional descriptions and industry terms alongside product names as search inputs. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Record the appearance finding separately from the unverified publication date. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

State which features are visible and clearly identify the missing views. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Compare the pattern separately from the product and surface to which it is applied. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Check the image orientation and possible edits together with the source. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

A filename alone should not be treated as proof of publication date. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Preserve the common product link and identify differences affecting the appearance separately. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Do not exclude a record from comparison solely because its product name differs. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Identify the concealed areas and their effect on the appearance assessment separately. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Do not treat the last update date as the date of first public disclosure. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Yes, clearly identify the surfaces and details you consider important to the assessment. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

The appearance disclosed by the rendering can be examined with its source and accessibility information. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Record each source and distinguish the earliest verifiable publication and image connections. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Link the product identity, sales source and acquisition information to the images. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Separate the findings on available pages from the uncertainty caused by missing sections. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Do not assume that enlargement reveals detail absent from the original image. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

The finding can be retained if the image and source information are explained despite the unknown identity. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Include samples showing the side profile when defining the comparison scope. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Separate the visible fragments from interpretations made from them. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Do not confuse the appearance disclosed by the packaging with the product’s actual appearance. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Keep the accessible archive record, date information and image together. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Yes, known local names and product codes can help define the search scope. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Keep the capture date separate from the content’s publication date. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Clearly separate accessible views from sections that could not be displayed. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Explain the shared detail separately from its relationship to the overall appearance. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Yes, explain the differences so it is clear which appearance is being researched. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Separate the image finding from the source’s unverified allegation. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Recognize explicitly that a country filter narrows the search scope. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

A detail comparison can be prepared, but retain the complete images alongside it. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Investigate which appearance the model code identified in each period. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Assess how much appearance it discloses and identify the missing details. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

A general copyright notice alone does not establish the product’s first publication date. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Yes, keep register dates and public disclosure dates as separate information. The source, date information and comparison image are recorded together. Visual similarity alone should not be assumed to establish a legal conclusion; the full file requires further examination.

Companies developing products, start-ups, design owners and organisations managing their rights commercially can all benefit.

It depends on the number of files, target countries, the scope of the research and official procedures.

Product images, any application or registration numbers, relevant contracts and information on target markets are useful to get started.

An international scope can be defined separately; legal and database conditions differ from country to country.

No. The review is based on the available documents and the agreed scope; it does not mean that administrative or judicial authorities will decide in a particular way.

A quote is prepared by considering the number of files, technical complexity, number of countries, level of report detail and official fees.

Preserve the relationship between the old and new product codes in the monitoring record. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Do not make a detailed appearance assessment without viewing the image. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Link both findings to the same review record while retaining their sources. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Examine views that distinguish camera-angle effects from genuine differences in shape. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Mark the apparently similar area and retain the full product view as well. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Yes, add the connection between the product and the new commercial name. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Check product references and images, then link the duplicate records. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Transfer the alert, source documents and open review notes to the authorized backup person. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

List the monitored products’ images and model references in a separate scope record. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Link the finding to the relevant earlier design record and its image sample. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Note that the source has closed and retain the findings and review history. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Check the original or a clearer image when the relevant similarity cannot be read. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Retain the listing sources and group their links in a single product review. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Do not exclude a visually relevant finding solely because its class differs. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Clarify the design and usage relationship to which the variant belongs. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Compare body shape and surface pattern similarities separately. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Yes, keep a decision note together with the assessment grounds. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Check whether the protected sample differs from the commercial promotional image. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Examine the shared and different appearance features disclosed by each representation. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Show the relevant design record together with the production model reference. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Save the page version used for assessment with its source and access information. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Keep country and source records separate while preserving the image connection. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Match the image sample directly against the register number to identify the error. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Show the detail together with its location on the complete product image. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Check whether other relevant usage positions are available. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Keep the earlier note and explain separately how the new information affected the decision. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Record supplier-to-product connections together with the image references. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Yes, distinguish unknown dimensions from visible shape characteristics. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Link the common part and the new overall appearance using separate samples. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Use the record number to add the ownership change to the action history. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Use filenames that distinguish the design reference, source and view. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Send the complete product view, the apparently similar detail and the source information together. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Add the current model image and record its differences from the previous version. The monitoring record keeps the product reference, identified publication and assessment note together. A notification starts a review; the appropriate action is determined after examining the relevant documents.

Companies developing products, start-ups, design owners and organisations that manage their rights commercially can benefit from it.

The time depends on the number of files, the target countries, the scope of the research and the official procedures.

Product images, application or registration numbers if any, relevant contracts and target market information are useful to start with.

An international scope can be defined separately; the legal and database conditions differ from country to country.

No. The review is based on the available documents and the defined scope; it does not mean that administrative or judicial authorities will reach the same conclusion.

A quote is prepared after considering the number of files, technical complexity, number of countries, level of detail in the report and official fees.

Companies that develop products, start-ups, design owners and organisations that manage their rights commercially can benefit from it.

It depends on the number of files, the target countries, the scope of research and the official procedures involved.

Product images, any application or registration numbers, related contracts and target market information are useful to start with.

International scope can be defined separately; each country has different legal and database conditions.

No. The review is based on the available documents and the agreed scope; it does not determine in advance what decision administrative or judicial authorities will reach.

A quote is prepared after considering the number of files, technical complexity, the number of countries, the level of report detail and official fees.

Companies developing products, start-ups, design owners and organisations that manage their rights commercially can benefit from it.

The time depends on the number of files, the target countries, the scope of research and the official procedures.

Product images, any application or registration numbers, relevant contracts and target market information are useful to start with.

International scope can be defined separately; the legal and database conditions differ from country to country.

No. The review is based on the existing documents and the agreed scope; it does not mean that the decision of administrative or judicial authorities is known in advance.

A quote is prepared after assessing the number of files, technical complexity, number of countries, level of report detail and official fees.

Check whether the reflection could be confused with the product’s actual appearance. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Prepare a photograph that distinguishes the product’s appearance from background objects. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Check that all views show the same design version. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Use consistent images to clarify that the different positions belong to the same product. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Clarify whether the label forms part of the appearance intended for protection. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Prepare consistent images with enough clarity to make the texture visible. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Distinguish the actual surface characteristics from reflections caused by photography. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Assess the role of the inner surface in the appearance intended for protection. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Provide both with the difference in appearance clearly marked for review. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Prepare clear, consistent groups for the fixed body and the different cover appearances. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Check that the hand neither hides the appearance nor becomes confused with the design. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Assess whether the ruler is clearly a photographic aid rather than part of the product. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Present the basic pattern and its repeat arrangement clearly. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Check that the images consistently represent the same product appearance. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

The packaging appearance and the product’s own appearance need separate consideration. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Make the distinction between shading and surface boundaries clear. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Request source and output examples that show the appearance without losing detail. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Clarify that the changing positions belong to the same product structure. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Yes, explain the basis for using third-party elements separately. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Use model references that distinguish each appearance rather than relying on the trade name. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Check the view names against the actual orientation of the images. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Assess each mode’s appearance and the shared elements using separate samples. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Use consistent sample data without personal information when preparing the images. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Check how variable markings relate to the product appearance and image consistency. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Yes, clarify the appearance relationship between the main product and the independent accessory. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Prepare the part’s own appearance separately from the overall set appearance. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Examine which surfaces are needed to explain the appearance intended for protection. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Check whether the drawing represents the product’s actual shape clearly and consistently. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Consider the pattern itself separately from the appearance of the underlying material. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Yes, explain the relationship between the signs used and the rights in the design separately. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Assess the roles of the illuminated and unilluminated appearances separately. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Review a consistent sample that prevents the damage from being mistaken for a design feature. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Prepare an additional image showing the relief’s shape clearly. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Identify the approved appearance and file version together using the supporting documents. It should be clear which product and application sample the appearance relates to. The application is assessed by examining the full set of proposed images together with the explanations in the file.

Check the payment record separately from the domain registrant information. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

Examine the registration account, authorized users and recovery information together. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

Domain registration and DNS administration can be managed through different accounts. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

Check the contact addresses and notification settings at the registrar. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

Yes, include the existing DNS records and service connections in the transfer plan. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

The domain name, registrar and displayed registrant are the basic matching details. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

Preserve and review the current permissions and account action history. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

Preserve the original messages, sender domain and relevant email headers. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

A redirect change alone does not show that the registrant has changed. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

The registrant information and account permissions also need checking. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

A technical registration lock should not be treated as the same thing as a trademark dispute. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

Check the actual domain spelling and the characters used. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

Keep the domain registrant and legal trademark owner in separate fields. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

Check the information in your known registrar account rather than following the message link. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

Prepare an inventory of web, email and verification services linked to the domain. The registrar’s information and the company’s own access records are checked together. Technical administration and claims to trademark or domain name rights require separate assessments.

Yes, explain which products use the old and current packaging. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Show the product and packaging characteristics associated with each manufacturing source separately. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Forward it to authorized people able to review the rights file and verify the product. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Check the serial number together with other product and distribution records. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Prepare clear images showing the details useful for identification. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Match each product group separately to its rights documents and identifying information. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Technical information contributing to product verification can be considered separately in the file. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Separate technical details for sharing according to their purpose and confidentiality scope. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Distinguish current and historical commercial relationships using dates and document links. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Check the match between the product model and the right identified in the notice. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Prepare the name-change documentation together with the current rights record. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

The presence of a barcode does not by itself verify product authenticity. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Clearly record the inconsistencies and identify which samples were examined. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Yes, record notification and action dates as distinct events. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Show each sign’s location and the relevant rights connection separately. Product descriptions, rights documents and the relevant shipment information are examined together. The appropriate customs action cannot be determined from the product name alone without reviewing the actual notice and current procedure.

Clearly identify the raw-material sources and where each production stage occurs. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Record the existing production differences separately with their supporting evidence. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Identify their sources and dates, then relate them to written records where available. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Check the product specification’s requirements for the packaging stage separately. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Yes, examine the actual method alongside the registered production description. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Prepare a label showing the separate roles of the geographical name and your business trademark. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Separate producer and seller information according to the actual supply relationship. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Yes, record the link between the sample and the relevant production batch. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Examine its technical meaning in the file together with the production records. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Record known name forms separately together with their usage sources. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Consider ingredient use separately from the identity of the final product. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Check the evidence linking the former and current names to the same business. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Separate the clipping’s content from the unverified date information. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

No, disclose the missing records and distinguish the evidence that can be verified. The product specification, production records and registered description are considered together. Compliance cannot be determined from the geographical name alone; the product conditions must also be checked.

Check the colour specifications for print and screen use separately. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Prepare usage samples at actual label and screen sizes. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Add spacing and layout examples showing the area around the logo. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Provide the approved proportions and correct usage examples in a shared file. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

A dark-background usage sample that preserves readability can be assessed. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Explain the font’s usage conditions and access arrangements within the delivery scope. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Yes, list image sources and the supporting basis for their use separately. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Clearly identify the scope of the delivered outputs and editable sources. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Define shared identity elements alongside the elements distinguishing each trademark. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Use separate samples to show the visual relationship between the shortened form and the main logo. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Yes, prepare layout examples for circular and narrow spaces. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Check whether its distinctive details remain clear in single-colour use. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Link each language’s approved example to the common visual layout. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Show the old and new examples to be used during the transition as separate versions. A separate usage sample can be prepared for this detail during the visual identity work. Design preferences and legal trademark protection require different assessments, so the register review is conducted separately.

Compare the product master data linked to the barcode with the sales channel record. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Check consumer-unit identification separately from logistics packaging identification. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Check the readability of the printed symbol as well as the number’s accuracy. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Yes, test the actual print and surface conditions on the finished packaging. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Examine the cards’ actual product characteristics and identification history together. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Describe the individual item and the set’s commercial presentation as separate product records. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Check the original number and whether formatting changed the data. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Compare both the encoded data and the printed digits with the source record. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Keep product identity and production batch information in separate fields. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Assess symbol readability on the packaging in its final shape. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Check the internal stock code separately from the standard product identifier. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Compare the master data with the product cards used by the dealers. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Verify the authorized source number and the check-digit calculation together. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Describe differences in product content and commercial presentation as well as the label language. The product master data, packaging information and sales channel description are checked together. Identification decisions must follow current product identification rules and the product’s commercial presentation, rather than the image alone.

Separate uncertainty about material identity from the records that can be verified. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Link the trial code, proposed variety name and commercial use through separate references. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Preserve each trial’s location, material identity and observations separately. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

No, describe the differences in observations together with the growing conditions. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Document the terms of supply and the basis for using the material. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Collect working notes, agreements and trial records that show the contributions. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Yes, explain the earlier commercial offering and names used, with dates. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Yes, state the growth stage and photographic conditions. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Check whether the variety identity matches the names and registration records. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Create a shared explanation list linking the abbreviations to the observation records. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Keep the material identity, delivery information and scope of work. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Document the connection between the nursery’s product code and the variety identity. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Explain verified origin information separately from the scope of missing documents. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Preserve the original source, observation context and accuracy of the transferred records. The variety’s identity, material records and relevant development documents are examined together. The application assessment must consider current requirements and go beyond the plant’s commercial name.

Request the application or registration number and a document identifying the recorded owner. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

Match each written form separately to its country and application sample. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

First identify the relevant file, the notice’s subject and its action details. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

Yes, explain the separate roles of sales, production and storage countries. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

Compare the local register entry with the applicant’s current documents. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

Check the existing representation and file arrangements separately for each country. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

Yes, explain where the different spellings are used through separate examples. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

Compare the original list with the accepted wording in the relevant country file. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

A document showing that an application was filed is not the same as a registration certificate. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

Assess the corporate group relationship separately from registered rights ownership. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

Compare the translation with the original technical disclosure and the relevant country document. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

Compare the original image set with the samples visible in the relevant country record. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

Explain the parties identified in the documents together with the trademark usage relationship. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.

Match international registration and local file numbers with their countries. The country file, application sample and relevant register information are checked together. An action in one country should not be assumed to have the same result elsewhere; local requirements are assessed separately.