Kazakh Trademark Office

Trademark Refusal Procedure in International Trademark Registration Procedure under Madrid Agreement and Madrid Protocol in Kazakhstan

I. Trademark Refusal Procedure in Kazakhstan - the Deadline for Responding to an Official Refusal

The time limit for the response to a refusal is three months starting from the date of the official refusal.
The applicant can obtain an extension of time to reply to the opposition. The limit of these extensions is one extension for a period of six months (one six-month request or six one-month requests).

II. Trademark Refusal Procedure in Kazakhstan

The person who may file the response to the provisional refusal is an individual or corporate proprietor without local representation, but with local address.
If the persons mentioned above cannot file the response, local representation must be assured.

The local representative may be:
1. An attorney registered as a patent attorney in Kazakhstan;
2. A trademark representative, registered as a patent attorney in Kazakhstan.

Oral hearings in proceeding applications for International Fillings are allowed.

III. International Trademark Examination Procedure in Kazakhstan

IV. Grounds of Trademark Refusals in Kazakhstan:

A trademark can be refused based on both absolute and relative grounds. The most commonly raised objections are:
1. Descriptiveness;
2. Prior rights.

V. Appeals against Final Decisions of Refusal in Trademark Registration Procedure in Kazakhstan

The law does not set the time limit for the National Office to release the first conclusion.

The appeal procedure is:
- For the preliminary result – appeal to the Trademark Department of the National Office;
- The second result – appeal to the Board of Appeals of the National Office;
- The result released by the Board of Appeals – appeal in court.

VI. Third Party Objections and Observations in Trademark Registration Procedure in Kazahstan

Any third party may make such an objection on the following grounds:
1. Descriptiveness;
2. Deceptiveness/mis-descriptiveness;
3. Generality;
4. Geographical meaning or deceptiveness;
5. Suggestion of connection with the party who made an objection;