Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2


The Registrar of Trade Marks

Office of the Trademark Registry, Delhi.

Re: Replying to Examination Report dated 05.10.2019 concerning trademark

application number 4289645 filed in the name of SANJAY AGARWAL PROPRIETOR

Dear Sir,

In response to the objections raised under the Trademark Act 1999 and Trademark
Rules 2002 as stated in the Examination Report, in respect of the above referred
Trademark application, we respectfully submit our reply as under:


1. The Trade Mark application is open to objection on relative grounds of refusal under
Section 11 of the Act because the same/similar trade mark(s) is/are already on record of
the register for the same or similar goods/services. The detail of same/similar
trademarks is enclosed herewith

The objection is raised under S 11 (1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, as the mark is
identical with or similar to earlier marks in respect of identical or similar description of
goods or services and because of such identity or similarity there exists a likelihood of
confusion on the part of the public.

Submission: We would like to submit that the applicant has applied the mark “SATYA
PREPARATIONS FOR MEDICAL PURPOSE.”. Thus, by applying the mark for
aforesaid description of goods/services the applicant has altogether given a new
meaning to the mark. The mark “SATYA PHARMACEUTICALS WITH DEVICE ” has
been applied for registration in totality and is completely unique and distinct. The
captioned mark “SATYA PHARMACEUTICALS WITH DEVICE” is extremely unique
and different as compared to the mark cited in the examination report.
The learned Examiner of TMR has also failed to realize that our client’s trademark bears
a unique pronounciation , display and font and is being created from the intellect and
hard labour of our client.

Further, we would like to submit that the learned Examiner has not considered the
whole mark together. She has only considered the prefix of the captioned mark.
Moreover, in all 2 marks have been cited by the learned Examiner and both the marks
are one and the same. Also, the cited marks are name given to medicines whereas the
captioned mark represents the name of the applicant. It is to be specifically noted that
the captioned mark is being used from 19.02.2002 and has acquired considerable
goodwill and reputation in the commercial market. The applicant of the captioned mark
is a registered entity by the name of SATYA PHARMACEUTICAL and in order to
acquire optimum protection over the name, the applicant has applied for the same with
Trademarks Registry.

It is to be specifically noted that the mark “SATYA PHARMACEUTICALS WITH

DEVICE” has been created out of sheer intellect and hard work of the applicant.

So, in view of the aforesaid point we humbly request the learned examiner to waive off
the objections as raised and proceed to advertise the mark in trademarks journal.

With regards and Thanks,

Sidharth Goyal (D/328/2010)

Attorney for the applicant
Attorney Code No. 7257
Global Jurix