Projects

• Client CANON KABUSHIKI KAISHA

  Notable Success in a Non-Use Cancellation Dispute

  Gorodissky team together with the client developed a defense strategy against trademark squatter based on proving lack of genuine interest. The claim was dismissed in full due to lack of  interest, without proceeding to examine the evidence of use presented by Canon.

  Read more

• Client LLC NPO Pharmvilar

  Successful Representation of the Client in a Pharmaceutical Patent Dispute

  The dispute lasted over four years. As a result of the coordinated work of the Consultant's patent attorneys and lawyers, as well as interaction with the Client, the Patent was declared invalid by the decision of Rospatent, which was confirmed by the Intellectual Property Court. As a result, the Arbitration Court of Moscow dismissed the Opponent's claim for infringement of the right to the invention under the Patent.

  Read more

• Client Setra Lubrikants LLC

  Successful Representation of the Client in a Patent Infringement Case

  The specialists from Gorodissky & Partners filed with the Russian PTO an opposition to the granting of the patent, and appealed the decision to the Moscow City Court. The Russian PTO held the patent fully invalid. Taking into account the decision of the Russian PTO, the Moscow City Court reversed the decision of the trial court and ruled for the client.

  Read more

• Client Dermophisiologique S.R.L. SB (Italy)

  Case No. СИП-180/2022: successful representation of the Client's interests in a dispute with Rospatent

  The specialists of Gorodissky & Partners successfully represented the Client's interests in court instances, as a result of which   trademark No. 652806 was cancelled. The illegally registered trademark could mislead consumers and cause significant damage to the Client’s intellectual property and business reputation.

  Read more

• Client Novolabsystem LLC (Russia)

  Successful Representation оf the Software Developer in the Dispute on the Exclusive Rights Enforcement

  Our firm’s lawyers were able to convince the judges that the Defendant had not unlawfully used the litigious computer programme, because it was using its own software, therefore, was exploiting its own exclusive rights.

  Read more