[Trademark News] Is “DIORLV” Similar to “DIOR”?

— A Case Where Opposition and Invalidation Led to Different Outcomes —
(Invalidation Trial No. 2022-890028)

◆ Overview

This case involves Christian Dior Couture, the owner of the trademarks “Dior” and “DIOR”, who filed an invalidation trial against the registered trademark “DIORLV”. The Japan Patent Office (JPO) found the marks to be similar and ultimately invalidated the registration.

What makes this case particularly noteworthy is that a prior opposition against the same trademark was unsuccessful, and the registration was initially maintained.

◆ Why the Judgments Differed

In the invalidation trial, the JPO recognized “DIOR” as a well-known trademark in the fashion industry. Since the designated goods for “DIORLV” were also fashion-related, the JPO determined that consumers would likely focus on the “DIOR” portion. Based on this, the two marks were found to be similar.

In contrast, in the earlier opposition proceeding, the JPO viewed “DIORLV” as an indivisible coined word, presented with uniform lettering and spacing. It concluded that there was no compelling reason to isolate the “DIOR” element for comparison.

◆ Systemic Differences Matter

Japan’s opposition system is non-adversarial and designed to allow the JPO to review newly registered trademarks in the public interest—within a limited post-registration window. Unless a clear error is found, oppositions are rarely successful; in fact, the opposition success rate in 2023 was below 10%.

This case serves as a valuable example demonstrating that even if an opposition fails, an invalidation trial may still succeed—depending on how the arguments are structured and the supporting evidence is presented.

——
Written by Mamiko Yoshida, Patent and Trademark Attorney, Trademark Group