Common use of Grounds for refusal Clause in Contracts

Grounds for refusal. 1. The description does not fully disclose all the designs as required in Article 103(3) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam, since the description does not list all main appearance characteristics of the designs. This reason for refusal may be overcome by submitting a corrected version of description to replace the current description. 2. Design 1, Design 2 are not significantly different from the prior design disclosed on xxxxx://xxx.xxxxxx.xx/dp/B08JLHTXV7 on 21/9/2020. Therefore, the designs in the registration do not meet the requirement of novelty as provided in Article 63(1) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and Article 35(7) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. 3. The registration contains multiple industrial designs but there is not any statement indicating that they are variants or a set of products; thus, it does not meet the requirement on the uniformity of industrial property registration applications according to Article 101(1) and Article 101(3) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam. The designs in the registration are not significantly different from each other. Therefore, these designs should be claimed as variants. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a notification, which shall indicate one of the designs as principle design and the other as variant. 4. The description includes the disclaimer (fig. 1.3 and fig. 2.3), therefore the claimed objects in the registration are not the whole articles. Thus, the subject matters contained in the registration are not circulated independently, therefore they are not the objects of protection as industrial designs as provided in Article 4(13) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and in Article 33(2)(b) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a corrected version of description in which the disclaimer has been removed. 5. The reproductions include the broken lines (fig. 1.3 and fig. 2.3), therefore the claimed objects in the registration are not the whole articles. Thus, they are not the objects of protection as industrial designs as provided in Article 4(13) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and in Article 33(2)(b) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a corrected set of reproductions with the broken lines being replaced with solid lines.

Grounds for refusal. 1. The description does not fully disclose all the designs as required in Article 103(3103(2)(a) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam, since the description does not list point out all main appearance characteristics of the designs. This reason for refusal may be overcome by submitting a corrected version of description to replace the current description. 2. Design According to the similarity between the designs in the registration, they can be divided into the following groups: Group 1, Design 2 : design 1 and design 4 are variants because they are not significantly different from the prior each other. Group 2: design disclosed on xxxxx://xxx.xxxxxx.xx/dp/B08JLHTXV7 on 21/9/20202 and design 3 are variants because they are not significantly different from each other. Therefore, the designs in the registration do not meet the requirement of novelty as provided in Article 63(1) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and Article 35(7) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. 3. The registration contains multiple industrial designs but there is not any statement indicating that they are variants or a set of products; thus, it does not meet the requirement on the uniformity of industrial property registration applications according to Article 101(1) and Article 101(3) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam. The designs in the registration are not significantly different from each other. Therefore, these designs should be claimed as variants. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a notification, which shall indicate declaration to keep one of the designs as principle mentioned design groups in the registration and separate the other as variantgroup into different registration. Each registration must have a separate description. If any registration includes a group of variants, the corresponding description must indicate this fact. 43. The description includes the disclaimer (fig. 1.3 and fig. 2.3)disclaimer, therefore the claimed objects in the registration are not the whole articles. Thus, the subject matters contained in the registration are not circulated independently, therefore they are not the objects of protection as industrial designs as provided in Article 4(13) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and in Article 33(2)(b) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a corrected version of description in which the disclaimer has been removed. 54. The reproductions include the broken lines (fig. 1.3 and fig. 2.3)lines, therefore the claimed objects in the registration are not the whole articles. Thus, the subject matters contained in the registration are not circulated independently, therefore they are not the objects of protection as industrial designs as provided in Article 4(13) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and in Article 33(2)(b) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a corrected set of reproductions with the broken lines being replaced with solid lines.

Grounds for refusal. 1. The description does not fully disclose all the designs as required in Article 103(3103(2)(a) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam, since the description does not list point out all main appearance characteristics of the designs. This reason for refusal may be overcome by submitting a corrected version of description to replace the current description. 2. Design According to the similarity between the designs in the registration, they can be divided into the following groups: Group 1, Design : design 1 and design 2 are variants because they are not significantly different from the prior each other. Group 2: design disclosed on xxxxx://xxx.xxxxxx.xx/dp/B08JLHTXV7 on 21/9/20203, design 4, design 5, design 6, design 7 and design 8 are variants because they are not significantly different from each other. Therefore, the designs in the registration do not meet the requirement of novelty as provided in Article 63(1) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and Article 35(7) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. 3. The registration contains multiple industrial designs but there is not any statement indicating that they are variants or a set of products; thus, it does not meet the requirement on the uniformity of industrial property registration applications according to Article 101(1) and Article 101(3) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam. The designs in the registration are not significantly different from each other. Therefore, these designs should be claimed as variants. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a notification, which shall indicate declaration to keep one of the designs as principle mentioned design and the other as variant. 4. The description includes the disclaimer (fig. 1.3 and fig. 2.3), therefore the claimed objects groups in the registration and separate the other group into different registration. Each registration must have a separate description. If any registration includes a group of variants, the corresponding description must indicate this fact. 3. The reproductions relating to design 7 and design 8 include the broken lines, therefore these objects are not the whole articles. Thus, the subject matters contained in the registration are articles and cannot be circulated independently, therefore they are not the objects of protection as industrial designs as provided in Article 4(13) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and in Article 33(2)(b) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a corrected version of description in which the disclaimer has been removed. 5. The reproductions include the broken lines (fig. 1.3 and fig. 2.3), therefore the claimed objects in the registration are not the whole articles. Thus, they are not the objects of protection as industrial designs as provided in Article 4(13) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and in Article 33(2)(b) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a corrected set of reproductions with the broken lines being replaced with solid lines. 4. The subject matters in the registration are not able to be registered as industrial designs in Viet Nam because they are not physical products and cannot be circulated independently as provided in Article 4(13) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and in Article 33(2)(b) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN.

Grounds for refusal. 1. The description does not fully disclose all the designs as required in Article 103(3103(2)(a) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam, since the description does not list point out all main appearance characteristics of the designs. This reason for refusal may be overcome by submitting a corrected version of description to replace the current description. 2. Design According to the similarity between the designs in the registration, they can be divided into the following groups: Group 1, Design 2 : design 1 and design 4 are variants because they are not significantly different from the prior each other. Group 2: design disclosed on xxxxx://xxx.xxxxxx.xx/dp/B08JLHTXV7 on 21/9/20202, design 3, design 5 and design 6 are variants because they are not significantly different from each other. Therefore, the designs in the registration do not meet the requirement of novelty as provided in Article 63(1) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and Article 35(7) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. 3. The registration contains multiple industrial designs but there is not any statement indicating that they are variants or a set of products; thus, it does not meet the requirement on the uniformity of industrial property registration applications according to Article 101(1) and Article 101(3) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam. The designs in the registration are not significantly different from each other. Therefore, these designs should be claimed as variants. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a notification, which shall indicate declaration to keep one of the designs as principle mentioned design groups in the registration and separate the other as variantgroup into different registration. Each registration must have a separate description. If any registration includes a group of variants, the corresponding description must indicate this fact. 43. The description includes the disclaimer (fig. 1.3 and fig. 2.3)disclaimer, therefore the claimed objects in the registration are not the whole articles. Thus, the subject matters contained in the registration are not circulated independently, therefore they are not the objects of protection as industrial designs as provided in Article 4(13) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and in Article 33(2)(b) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a corrected version of description in which the disclaimer has been removed. 54. The reproductions include the broken lines (fig. 1.3 and fig. 2.3)lines, therefore the claimed objects in the registration are not the whole articles. Thus, the subject matters contained in the registration are not circulated independently, therefore they are not the objects of protection as industrial designs as provided in Article 4(13) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and in Article 33(2)(b) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a corrected set of reproductions with the broken lines being replaced with solid lines. 5. Design 2, design 3, design 5 and design 6 in the registration are not significantly different from the designs in the registration DM/223960 and DM/223980 with the same priority date; therefore, design 2, design 3, design 5 and design 6 in the registration do not meet the requirement of the first-to-file principle as provided in Article 90(2) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam.

Grounds for refusal. 1. The description does not fully disclose all the designs as required in Article 103(3103(2)(a) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam, since the description does not list point out all main appearance characteristics of the designs. This reason for refusal may be overcome by submitting a corrected version of description to replace the current description. 2. Design According to the similarity between the designs in the registration, they can be divided into the following groups: Group 1, Design : design 1 and design 2 are variants because they are not significantly different from the prior each other. Group 2: design disclosed on xxxxx://xxx.xxxxxx.xx/dp/B08JLHTXV7 on 21/9/20203 and design 4 are variants because they are not significantly different from each other. Group 3: design 5 and design 6 are variants because they are not significantly different from each other. Group 4: design 7 and design 8 are variants because they are not significantly different from each other. Group 5: design 10 and design 9 are variants because they are not significantly different from each other. Therefore, the designs in the registration do not meet the requirement of novelty as provided in Article 63(1) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and Article 35(7) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. 3. The registration contains multiple industrial designs but there is not any statement indicating that they are variants or a set of products; thus, it does not meet the requirement on the uniformity of industrial property registration applications according to Article 101(1) and Article 101(3) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam. The designs in the registration are not significantly different from each other. Therefore, these designs should be claimed as variants. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a notification, which shall indicate declaration to keep one of the designs as principle mentioned design and the other as variant. 4. The description includes the disclaimer (fig. 1.3 and fig. 2.3), therefore the claimed objects groups in the registration and separate the other groups into different registrations, each for one group. Each registration must have a separate description. If any registration includes a group of variants, the corresponding description must indicate this fact. 3. The reproductions relating to design 10, design 2, design 4, design 6 and design 8 include the broken lines, therefore these objects are not the whole articles. Thus, the subject matters contained in the registration are articles and cannot be circulated independently, therefore they are not the objects of protection as industrial designs as provided in Article 4(13) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and in Article 33(2)(b) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a corrected version of description in which the disclaimer has been removed. 5. The reproductions include the broken lines (fig. 1.3 and fig. 2.3), therefore the claimed objects in the registration are not the whole articles. Thus, they are not the objects of protection as industrial designs as provided in Article 4(13) of the Intellectual Property Law of Viet Nam and in Article 33(2)(b) of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN. This reason for refusal may be overcome if the registration holder submits a corrected set of reproductions with the broken lines being replaced with solid lines. If design 1 is identical with design 2 after replacing with solid lines, the registration holder must remove one of two designs from the registration. Similarly, if design 3 is identical with design 4 after replacing with solid lines, the registration holder must remove one of two designs from the registration. If design 5 is identical with design 6 after replacing with solid lines, the registration holder must remove one of two designs from the registration. If design 7 is identical with design 8 after replacing with solid lines, the registration holder must remove one of two designs from the registration. If design 9 is identical with design 10 after replacing with solid lines, the registration holder must remove one of two designs from the registration.