REGISTER now: Visser ai webinar - BEYOND THE HYPE: AI IN PATENT PROSECUTION
​

Online image searches for designs and marks

No items found.
​
August 29, 2013
Additional information
Chevron icon
Info
Tags
Building a Resilient Quantum Patent Portfolio: Winning the Race to File First
Table of contents
Chevron icon
Table of contents
  • Toc Heading
  • Toc Heading

An online image search tool for figurative trademarks and designs could be launched under new proposals by the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM).

OHIM is currently developing a tool to carry out image searching online in line with feedback received from delegates at the international conference held to celebrate 10 years of the Registered Community Design (RCD) system in April 2013, on how to improve the RCD system.

Would the adoption of an online image search tool improve the RCD system, as applicants could more easily assess whether or not similar designs already exist prior to filing? Could this tool lead to bad practices or risks where the owners of designs are uploading images of as yet unfiled designs? What do you think? Tweet us @EIP_Designs

Recent Case Reports

See all Case Reports

No language change at Central Division
08 October 2026
Proceedings before the UPC Central Division must be conducted in the language in which the patent was granted. There is no legal basis to change that language. In a revocation action concerning a German-language patent, the Paris Central Division rejected a request to switch the language of proceedings to English, and also rejected a subsidiary request to allow written submissions in English and hold the hearing in English, holding that Article 49(6) UPCA permits no derogation and reflects a deliberate legislative choice.
​
Criteria for obtaining an order to produce evidence under Rule 190
07 October 2026
This appeal judgment clarifies that Rule 190 orders to produce evidence require three cumulative conditions: specificity, necessity and proportionality, and cannot be used for fishing expeditions. The Court of Appeal confirmed that first instance judges enjoy a broad margin of discretion when assessing such requests, and upheld the order requiring production of two fabric samples for ballistic testing. Both the appeal and the cross-appeal were dismissed.
​
Court of Appeal focuses on the technical effect to determine added matter
30 September 2026
The Court of Appeal provided guidance on their approach to assessing added subject matter, highlighting that the technical effect underlying the invention and how the claimed and unclaimed features contribute thereto is central to the analysis.
​