Speeding Up the Trademark Opposition Resolution Process in Argentina: A Look at Resolution 295/2024
The trademark opposition resolution process in Argentina has historically been lengthy. For example, in the past, the cooling-off or negotiation period lasted a full year, and if no agreement was reached—often as a strategy on the part of the opponent—the process had to continue before the Federal Courts. Otherwise, the application would be denied.
In 2018, in an effort to streamline the process, legislative changes were introduced allowing the Trademark Office to decide these disputes. This reform also altered the procedure by requiring the opponent—if no settlement was reached—to advance the proceedings by paying a fee and submitting their arguments. If they did, the applicant was notified to submit a response. After the evidence and arguments stages, the Argentine Patent and Trademark Office (INPI) would issue a decision on whether the opposition was justified.
Initially, it seemed this regulation would accelerate the process. However, nearly five years later, experience shows this has not been the case. There’s still a minimum delay of 18 months before receiving a resolution.
In response, the Trademark Office (INPI) has recently started taking steps to speed up the process (e.g., significantly reducing the time between filing an opposition and its notification, or the gap between procedural stages). Finally, on July 23, the INPI issued Resolution 295/2024, which indirectly builds on this momentum.
According to the Trademark Office, in around 70% of cases, the applicant does not respond at all to the opponent’s brief, indicating—although not conclusively—that in many cases, the applicant has simply lost interest in the application.
The new regulation introduces an additional requirement: applicants who receive notice of the continuation of an opposition must now pay a fee to show their intent to move forward with the registration and to obtain a decision. Failure to pay the fee will result in outright rejection of the application. Furthermore, pending cases where the applicant has not yet responded will be reviewed, and those wishing to continue must now also pay the new fee.
Why do we say this is an indirect solution? It comes down to procedural efficiency: the new measure aims to ensure that the few examiners available focus their time and efforts only on cases where both parties have a genuine interest in the outcome.
One concern, however, is that the Trademark Office might reject applications due to baseless oppositions—because if the applicant doesn’t pay, the INPI won’t evaluate the opposition’s merit; it will simply deny the application. Still, in an era where projects move at high speed and state protection mechanisms lag behind, any initiative that improves or accelerates processes is welcome.