Mexican standoff: how the recognition of consent letters is enabling trademark coexistence
Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX
Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Mexican standoff: how the recognition of consent letters is enabling trademark coexistence

Sponsored by

olivares-400px.jpg
laptop-3196481.jpg

Several pieces of Mexican legislation in recent years have established the validity of consent letters in formalising the coexistence of identical or similar trademarks, explains Sergio Olivares Nieto of OLIVARES

In the field of industrial property, a letter of consent is a document frequently used internationally to overcome potential conflicts between identical or confusingly similar trademarks. Such a document is basically the written consent of a person or an entity whose rights could be affected by a third party's trademark application.

For a long time, consent letters or other documents such as coexistence agreements were not ruled on in Mexican law, and their acceptance was subject to the criteria adopted by the trademark office, which changed frequently with the changes of the administration in turn.

However, as of August 10, 2018, the date on which the amendments to the Federal Industrial Property Law (a previous law) entered into force, these types of documents were expressly recognized in Mexican legislation as a valid means to allow the coexistence of identical or similar trademarks of different holders.

The role of consent letters in Mexico

The Mexican Institute of Industrial Property considers the consent letter as an element that can be filed by applicants to demonstrate that there is an agreement or consent on the part of the affected party. The submission of a consent letter can help to avoid possible oppositions or refusals to an application for registration of a similar trademark and is likewise a remedy that ensures the possibilities of overcoming an objection raised by the examiner.

The acceptance of such documents, in accordance with the penultimate paragraph of Section XXII of Article 173 of the Federal Law on the Protection of Industrial Property that came into effect in 2020, applies by way of exception in the case of similar marks in degree of confusion or identical trademarks for similar products or services. In this sense, the only situation that is not covered by the exception is identical trademarks for identical products or services.

It is worth mentioning that to obtain a letter of consent, it is necessary to approach the owner of the trademark registration to initiate a negotiation, in which the necessary clauses can be added to achieve the objective of the letter of consent; namely, coexistence in the registration of two similar trademarks.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Matt Garver and Peter Mattei of CAS what information companies should be getting from patent monitoring programmes
Sources say stakeholders may have an easier time challenging policies from IP agencies in the wake of a Supreme Court ruling
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Alban Kang, who has joined Singapore-based Robinson after three decades at Bird & Bird ATMD, shares why he’s eyeing AI and patent cases
Lawyers weigh in on arbitration, overseas registrations, and domestic scrutiny, one year after Abitron Austria v Hetronic
The Bardehle Pagenberg partner explains how the firm has evolved to the point of handling about a third of Unified Patent Court cases and enjoying notable success in the Managing IP EMEA Awards 2024
The managing partner of Martini Manna & Partners explains the key factors that contributed to the firm being recognised in the Managing IP EMEA Awards 2024 and considers the latest intellectual property trends
The UPC must be careful to maintain an equal gender balance among its judges after a spate of appointments weighed heavily in favour of men
Case between two property developers could highlight the importance of suing the affiliates of alleged infringers in trademark cases
Patent lawyers explain why the first half of 2024 has brought a focus on the UPC, terminal disclaimers, and AI policy
Gift this article