Showing posts with label :Cipla Health Limited Vs Glister Pharmaceuticals Limited. Show all posts
Showing posts with label :Cipla Health Limited Vs Glister Pharmaceuticals Limited. Show all posts

Sunday, June 2, 2024

:Cipla Health Limited Vs Glister Pharmaceuticals Limited

Cipla Limited Files Lawsuit Against OLNIGEL for Copyright  Infringement and passing off

Cipla Limited has initiated legal action to prevent the defendants from infringing copyright and passing off their trademark "OMNIGEL." The case centers on the defendants' use of the mark "OLNIGEL," which Cipla contends is almost identical to its established trademark, leading to potential consumer confusion.

Cipla's connection to the "OMNIGEL" trademark dates back to 2000, when it adopted the mark for its line of topical analgesics containing Diclofenac. The company's predecessor, Cipla Limited, had previously registered the device mark "OMNI" in Class 5, with use dating back to 1937. Since adopting "OMNIGEL," Cipla has used distinctive trade dress and packaging for its products, which the company argues has become well-recognized among consumers.

In the second week of May 2024, Cipla's representatives discovered the defendants marketing a product under the name "OLNIGEL." Cipla claims this product not only bears a deceptively similar name but also uses nearly identical packaging and trade dress. Both products are pain relief gels marketed through identical trade channels and to the same class of consumers.

The court, upon a prima facie analysis, found substantial similarities between the two marks, noting that "OMNIGEL" and "OLNIGEL" differ only by a single letter. Additionally, the court observed that the packaging, color schemes, taglines, and motifs of the two products were almost indistinguishable.

Based on these findings, the court concluded that Cipla has established a strong prima facie case of copyright infringement and passing off. The court determined that failing to grant an ex-parte ad-interim injunction would likely result in irreparable harm to Cipla. Consequently, the court issued the injunction, favoring Cipla and restricting the defendants from continuing to use the contested mark and packaging pending further legal proceedings.

Case Title:Cipla Health Limited Vs Glister Pharmaceuticals Limited

Judgement/Order Date: 27.05.2024

Case No. CS(COMM) 441/2024

Neutral Citation:NA

Name of Court: Delhi High Court

Name of Hon'ble Judge: Sanjeev Narula. H.J.

Disclaimer:

Ideas, thoughts, views, information, discussions and interpretation expressed herein are being shared in the public Interest. Readers' discretion is advised as these are subject to my subjectivity and may contain human errors in perception, interpretation and presentation of the fact and issue involved herein.

Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman

IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney]

United & United

Email: amitabh@unitedandunited.com

Ph No: 9990389539

Featured Post

WHETHER THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARK IS REQUIRED TO BE SUMMONED IN A CIVIL SUIT TRIAL PROCEEDING

WHETHER THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARK IS REQUIRED TO BE SUMMONED IN A CIVIL SUIT TRIAL PROCEEDING IN ORDER TO PROVE THE TRADEMARK  REGISTRA...

My Blog List

IPR UPDATE BY ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN

IPR UPDATE BY ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN

Search This Blog