Trademark Caselaw | Ecuador | NESTLÉ Loses 7-year Battle for Trademark PURA VIDA
OCDI, Ecuador’s IP administrative court, put an end to Société des Produits Nestlé’s attempt to secure trademark rights over PURA VIDA in connection with beverages, including beers and spring water, among other, in class, 32, which stretched for 7 seven years, on the administrative level.
The trademarks office had, initially, admitted Peruvian company Gloria S.A.’s opposition against Nestlé’s application, because it owns a registration for Trademark PURA VIDA.
Gloria S.A.’s PURA VIDA bottled water
Nestlé appealed the refusal on three different occasions, during 2017, 2019 and finally 2020, basically stating the trademarks office failed to justify its decision and that it had a preferential right that stems from owning Bolivian registrations for trademark PURA VIDA, based on which it had filed Andean oppositions that should result in the decision on the appeals being suspended, until a final decision is reached regarding such oppositions.
However, in its November 12 decision, the administrative court agreed with the trademarks office and found that its decision regarding the appeal did not need to be suspended, pending the result of the Andean oppositions, since the case at hand related to a trademark office’s decision, based on a specific registration owned by Gloria S.A., for trademark PURA VIDA. It also concurred with the trademark office’s refusal of the proposed mark PURA VIDA, finding that it would cause confusion, as a result of being identical to the pre-existing registered mark and identifying the exact same goods, in class 32.
Nestlé PURE LIFE bottled water
Although it did not seem to be a factor in this case, Nestlé has been known to own trademark PURE LIFE, which translates into Spanish as “pura vida” or “vida pura” .
Source: https://www.nestle.com/brands/allbrands/nestle-pure-life
Additionally, and regarding Nestlé’s claim to pre-existing trademark rights over PURA VIDA in Bolivia, the court confirmed the trademark offices decision based on the principle of territoriality in Industrial Property Law, according to which its rights resulting from Bolivian trademark registrations are not affected by those corresponding to Gloria S.A. in Ecuador.
Finally, the court found that Nestlé’s third appeal failed to provide new data that would support revoking the trademark office’s refusal and, thus, confirmed it.
OCDI’s decision can still be subject to judicial appeal.
Click here to request a copy of OCDI’s decision or in case you wish any additional information.
