In short
When an invalidity action is filed, the registration does not fall of itself. The right holder reads the served petition and the entry on the register side by side. The petition does not stand in for the judgment. What causes use to be stopped comes onto the agenda only if a decision says so. That an action was filed does not mean the document was erased that day.
The petition does not erase the register
The petition claims why the registration should be treated as invalid. The register shows whether the registration was standing that day. The two are not the same paper. Sale is not treated as prohibited of itself because an action was filed. If a prohibition is written separately in the text of an interim order, that text is read. While there is no decision, the register stands. A register that stands does not, in a single sentence, also say that use may continue. The limit of use, if there is one, is in the decision.
If the registration number in the statement of claim is not the same as the number on the certificate, a reply may have been given to the wrong entry. The number is confirmed against the register extract. If the date of the extract was renewed after the date of the action, the earlier entry also stands in the file. The earlier entry is not treated as absent. Which entry the action was filed against is read from the first page of the petition.
The interim order and the judgment
If the interim order says use shall stop, its scope is read. The scope may not be all the goods. If the order writes only a particular product, or a particular channel, other use is not treated as having stopped of itself because it is not in the order. The order is not a final judgment. Striking off the register is not requested as if the registration had fallen before judgment is given.
If the judgment decides that the registration is invalid, the result is read from that judgment. It is not assumed that the register will be erased of itself before the judgment becomes final. If there is no annotation of finality, the judgment is not mixed with a petition that has been served. The date of service is the start in the file for the reply. This article does not freeze that period as a number. The number is in the service and in the relevant procedural text.
Cancellation and usurpation are not a copy of this file
Cancellation based on non-use is not the same petition as an invalidity action. Which door the papers that arrived write is read from the heading. If the heading and the ground conflict, the conflict is stated separately in the reply. Someone else registering your sign is the opposite direction of an action filed against you. An action that comes to you is not the text of a usurpation file you would file. The papers of the two directions are not melted into one envelope.
The year of protection, and the period spoken of for usurpation, are not a number in this article. The number is in the current text of the statute and in the concrete document. A year that is not written in the document is not added to the reply petition. A year that is added neither strikes the register nor keeps it standing. The right holder puts in the date of the registration certificate in hand and the register extract. The date stands in for an invented calculation of protection.
The documents that stand in the reply
The registration certificate, invoices of use, and any earlier opposition file may stand in the reply. An invoice shows on which goods the sign was used. How use is proved is not the same sentence as the logic in the opposition file. In an action filed against you, which document will be of use is chosen according to the claim in the petition. A pile of invoices is not attached before the claim is read.
The power of attorney and the service slip show against whom the reply period runs. If service went to the company's old address, the procedure of service is asked separately. A problem of procedure does not mean the registration has fallen. Procedure and the merits are not melted in the same paragraph. The merits are whether the entry on the register will be treated as invalid.
The reply petition is not an acceptance of the action. Acceptance is by an open sentence. Writing that use continues does not mean acceptance of the invalidity of the registration. The right holder shows from the document that the register entry stands. The document that is shown matches the claim in the petition.
The procedure for filing the action is in trademark invalidity, and the separation of invalidity and cancellation is in the article the two doors. Cancellation based on non-use is in an unused trademark, the earlier user is in a prior registration, and showing use is in the article proof of use.
The papers that were served
The served petition, the registration certificate, and the register extract are placed side by side. The office being in Çankaya does not change the court that will hear the action. The competent authority is read from the jurisdiction in the statement of claim and from the place the service came from.
Conclusion
In an invalidity file the registration falls by the judgment, not by the petition. Service does not erase the register. The frame is on the intellectual property page.
The basis is the Industrial Property Law No. 6769.