natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Exceptions will be examined by the Office upon request from the EUTM applicant and/or on the basis of third-party observations. 
Urad prouči izjeme na zahtevo prijavitelja blagovne znamke EU in/ali na podlagi pripomb tretjih oseb.
See also the Annex of the CPVO Guidelines on Article 63 CPVRR on the meaning of ‘closely related species'. 
O pomenu zelo sorodnih vrst glej tudi prilogo k CPVO Guidelines on Article 63 CPVRR (Smernice urada CPVO glede člena 63 Uredbe o žlahtniteljskih pravicah v Skupnosti).
Finally, when more than one plant variety denomination appears as an essential element in a trade mark application, for example a plant variety denomination for ‘apples' and another one for ‘strawberries', the list of goods will have to be limited in order to exclude the goods covered by each plant variety denomination, that is to say, apples and strawberries. 
Če prijava za blagovno znamko kot bistveni element vsebuje več kot eno ime rastlinske sorte, na primer ime rastlinske sorte za „jabolka“ in ime rastlinske sorte za „jagode“, je treba seznam blaga omejiti, da se izključi blago, ki ga zajema posamezno ime rastlinske sorte, tj. jabolka in jagode.
Examples of objections and limitations: 
Primeri ugovorov in omejitev:
4.5 Relationship with other EUTMR provisions 
Povezava z drugimi določbami Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU
Where a plant variety denomination is used in the market but has not been registered or published in the CPVO or at national level, Article 7(1)(c) and (d) EUTMR might be applicable. 
Če se na trgu uporablja ime rastlinske sorte, ki še ni bilo registrirano ali objavljeno v registru urada CPVO ali na nacionalni ravni, se morda uporablja člen 7(1)(c) in (d) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU.
Goods Comment 
Blago Pripomba
Fruits and vegetables ANTONIO is a registered plant variety denomination for peppers. 
Sadje in zelenjava ANTONIO je registrirano ime rastlinske sorte za paprike.
Therefore, the Office will not object. 
Št. blagovne znamke EU Blago Pripomba
EUTM No Goods Comment 
Prijava blagovne znamke EU št.
EUTM application No 13 714 803 Wheat in Class 31 ‘Africa' is protected at European level (QZ code) for ‘wheat'. 
13 714 803 Pšenica iz razreda 31 Izraz „Africa“ je zaščiten na evropski ravni (oznaka QZ) za „pšenico“.
The objection was overcome through a limitation (not including wheat seeds). 
Ugovor je bil odpravljen z omejitvijo (ne vključuje semen pšenice).
The objection was overcome through a limitation. 
Ugovor je bil odpravljen z omejitvijo.
However, due to the small size of the term ‘nature' and to the integration into a longer phrase, the word ‘nature' plays a secondary role and will not be perceived as a CPVO. 
Zaradi majhnosti izraza nature in vključitve v daljšo besedno zvezo ima beseda „nature“ drugotno vlogo in se ne bo zaznala kot poimenovanje rastlinske sorte.
The mark is accepted. 
Znamka se sprejme.
Guidelines for Examination in the Office, Part B Examination Page 2 
Smernice za preizkušanje v Uradu, del B, Preizkušanje Stran 1
Absolute Grounds for Refusal - Acquired Distinctiveness Through Use 
Absolutni razlogi za zavrnitev - Razlikovalni učinek, pridobljen z uporabo
EUROPEAN UNION 
URAD EVROPSKE UNIJE ZA INTELEKTUALNO LASTNINO
CHAPTER 14 
POGLAVJE 14
ACQUIRED DISTINCTIVENESS 
RAZLIKOVALNI UČINEK,
THROUGH USE 
PRIDOBLJEN Z UPORABO
(ARTICLE 7(3) EUTMR) 
(ČLEN 7(3) UREDBE O BLAGOVNI ZNAMKI EU)
2 Requests 3 
2 Zahteve 3
3 The Point in Time for which Acquired Distinctiveness has to be Established 4 
3 Trenutek, za katerega je treba ugotoviti razlikovalni učinek, pridobljen z uporabo 4
3.1 Examination proceedings 4 
3.1 Postopek preizkušanja 4
3.2 Cancellation proceedings 4 
3.2 Postopek izbrisa 4
4 Consumers 5 
4 Potrošniki 5
5 Goods and Services 5 
5 Blago in storitve 5
6 Territorial Aspects 5 
6 Ozemeljski vidiki 5
6.1 Special provisions with respect to the accession of new Member States 6 
6.1 Posebne določbe v zvezi s pristopom novih držav članic 6
6.2 Language area 6 
6.2 Jezikovno območje 6
6.3 Extrapolation 7 
6.3 Izpeljava 7
7 Standard of Proof 9 
7 Dokazni standard 8
8 Assessment of the Evidence 10 
8 Presoja dokazov 10
8.1 Opinion polls and surveys 11 
8.1 Javnomnenjske in tržne raziskave 11
8.2 Market share, advertising and turnover 12 
8.2 Tržni delež, oglaševanje in promet 11
8.3 Declarations, affidavits and written statements 13 
8.3 Izjave, zaprisežene pisne izjave in pisne izjave 12
8.4 Prior registrations and acquired distinctiveness 13 
8.4 Prejšnje registracije in pridobljeni razlikovalni učinek 13
8.7 Post-filing date evidence 15 
8.7 Dokazi, predloženi po datumu vložitve 15
9 Consequences of Acquired Distinctiveness 16 
9 Posledice pridobljenega razlikovalnega učinka 15
According to Article 7(3) EUTMR, a trade mark may still be registered despite the fact that it does not comply with Article 7(1)(b), (c) or (d) EUTMR, provided that it ‘has become distinctive in relation to the goods or services for which registration is requested in consequence of the use which has been made of it'. 
V skladu s členom 7(3) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU se blagovna znamka še vedno lahko registrira, tudi če ni skladna s členom 7(1)(b), (c) ali (d) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, če „je znamka z uporabo pridobila razlikovalni učinek za blago ali storitve, za katere se zahteva registracija“.
Article 7(3) EUTMR constitutes an exception to the rule laid down in Article 7(1)(b), (c) or (d) EUTMR whereby registration must be refused for trade marks that are per se devoid of any distinctive character, for descriptive marks, and for marks that consist exclusively of indications that have become customary in the current language or in the bona fide and established practices of the trade. 
Člen 7(3) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU je izjema od pravila iz člena 7(1)(b), (c) ali (d) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, pri čemer je treba zavrniti registracijo blagovnih znamk, ki so brez slehernega razlikovalnega učinka, opisnih znamk in znamk, ki jih sestavljajo izključno znaki ali označbe, ki so postali običajni v jezikovni rabi ali v dobroverni ustaljeni praksi trgovanja.
Distinctive character acquired through use means that, although the sign lacks inherent distinctiveness ab initio with regard to the goods and services claimed, at least a significant proportion of the relevant public has, owing to the use made of it on the market, come to see it as identifying the goods and services claimed in the EUTM application as originating from a particular undertaking. 
Razlikovalni učinek, pridobljen z uporabo, pomeni, da čeprav znak od začetka nima svojstvenega razlikovalnega učinka v zvezi z blagom in storitvami, za katere se zahteva varstvo, ga precejšnji delež upoštevne javnosti zaradi uporabe na trgu zazna kot znak, ki označuje blago in storitve, za katere se v prijavi blagovne znamke EU zahteva varstvo, in izvira iz zadevnega podjetja.
Thus, the sign has become capable of distinguishing those goods and services from those of other undertakings because they are perceived as originating from a particular undertaking. 
Znak tako omogoča razlikovanje tega blaga in storitev od blaga in storitev drugih podjetij, ker se zaznajo kot blago in storitve, ki izvirajo iz zadevnega podjetja.
In this way, a sign originally unable to be registered under Article 7(1)(b), (c) or (d) EUTMR can acquire new significance, and its connotation, no longer purely descriptive or non-distinctive, allows it to overcome those absolute grounds for refusal of registration as a trade mark. 
Tako lahko znak, ki ga sprva ni bilo mogoče registrirati na podlagi člena 7(1)(b), (c) ali (d) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, pridobi nov pomen, njegova konotacija, ki ni več izključno opisna ali nerazlikovalna, pa omogoča odpravo teh absolutnih razlogov za zavrnitev registracije kot blagovna znamka.
2 Requests 
Zahteve
The Office will only examine acquired distinctive character following a request from the EUTM applicant. 
Urad preizkusi pridobljeni razlikovalni učinek samo na zahtevo prijavitelja blagovne znamke EU.
The Office is not bound to examine facts showing that the mark claimed has become distinctive through use within the meaning of Article 7(3) EUTMR unless the applicant has pleaded them (12/12/2002, T247/01, Ecopy, EU:T:2002:319, § 47). 
Urad ni dolžan preizkusiti dejstev, ki kažejo, da je znamka, ki se zahteva, pridobila razlikovalni učinek z uporabo v smislu člena 7(3) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, razen če prijavitelj zahteva njihov preizkus (12/12/2002, T247/01, Ecopy, EU:T:2002:319, § 47).
According to Article 2(2) EUTMIR, the application may include a claim that the sign has acquired distinctive character through use within the meaning of Article 7(3) EUTMR, as well as an indication of whether this claim is meant as a principal or subsidiary one. 
V skladu s členom 2(2) Izvedbene uredbe lahko prijava vsebuje zahtevo, da je znak z uporabo pridobil razlikovalni učinek v smislu člena 7(3) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, ter navedbo, ali je ta zahteva mišljena kot glavna ali pomožna.
Such claim may also be made within the period referred to in Article 42(2), second sentence, EUTMR. 
To se lahko zahteva tudi v roku iz drugega stavka člena 42(2) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU.
Therefore, as from 01/10/2017 and in accordance with Article 2(2) EUTMIR, the applicant can make the claim as a principal one (i.e. irrespective of the outcome on inherent distinctiveness), in which case the Office will take a single decision both on the mark's inherent distinctiveness and, where there is none, on the claim of acquired distinctiveness through use. 
Prijavitelj lahko od 1. oktobra 2017 in v skladu s členom 2(2) Izvedbene uredbe vloži glavno zahtevo (tj. ne glede na ugotovitev glede svojstvenega razlikovalnega učinka), v tem primeru Urad sprejme eno odločbo o svojstvenem razlikovalnem učinku znamke in, če ga znamka nima, o zahtevi za razlikovalni učinek, pridobljen z uporabo.
The second (new) option is to make the claim as a subsidiary one subject to a decision on inherent distinctiveness. 
Druga (nova) možnost je vložitev pomožne zahteve, ki je odvisna od odločbe o svojstvenem razlikovalnem učinku.
In this case the Office will take two separate decisions at different points in time: first, one on the mark's inherent distinctiveness and then, once that decision (finding lack of inherent distinctiveness) has become final, another on the claim of acquired distinctiveness through use. 
Urad v tem primeru sprejme dve ločeni odločbi ob različnem času: najprej odločbo o svojstvenem razlikovalnem učinku in zatem, ko ta odločba (s katero se ugotovi, da znamka nima svojstvenega razlikovalnega učinka) postane dokončna, drugo odločbo o zahtevi za razlikovalni učinek, pridobljen z uporabo.
The claim must clearly and precisely identify what type it is. 
Zahteva mora jasno in natančno opredeliti, za katero vrsto zahteve gre.
As regards the timing of the request, both types of claim may be made: 
Glede časovnega okvira zahteve se lahko obe vrsti zahteve vloži:
together with the application; or 
skupaj s prijavo ali
at the latest, in reply to the examiner's first objection. 
najpozneje v odgovoru na prvi ugovor preizkuševalca.
Therefore, it will not be possible to raise the claim of acquired distinctiveness through use for the first time in appeal proceedings. 
Zato zahteve za razlikovalni učinek, pridobljen z uporabo, ne bo mogoče prvič vložiti v postopku ugovora.
Where the applicant has validly made a subsidiary claim, the examiner will only decide on the inherent distinctiveness of the mark applied for and allow (in application of Article 66(2) EUTMR) this partial decision to be appealed in a separate appeal. 
Če je prijavitelj vložil veljavno pomožno zahtevo, preizkuševalec odloči samo o svojstvenem razlikovalnem učinku znamke, za katero je vložena prijava, in omogoči (na podlagi uporabe člena 66(2) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU) ugovor zoper to delno odločbo v ločenem ugovoru.
Once that partial decision has become final, the examiner will resume the examination proceedings regarding the claim for acquired distinctiveness through use, specifying - with reference to the final findings on lack of inherent distinctiveness (public, territory, goods and services) - the time limit for submitting the corresponding evidence to substantiate that claim. 
Ko ta delna odločba postane dokončna, preizkuševalec nadaljuje postopek preizkušanja v zvezi z zahtevo za razlikovalni učinek, pridobljen z uporabo, in določi - glede na končne ugotovitve glede neobstoja svojstvenega razlikovalnega učinka (javnost, ozemlje, blago in storitve) - rok za predložitev ustreznih dokazov v podporo zahtevi.
3 The Point in Time for which Acquired Distinctiveness has to be Established 
Trenutek, za katerega je treba ugotoviti razlikovalni učinek, pridobljen z uporabo
The evidence must prove that distinctiveness through use was acquired prior to the EUTM application's filing date. 
Dokazi morajo podpreti, da je bil razlikovalni učinek, pridobljen z uporabo, pridobljen pred datumom vložitve prijave blagovne znamke EU.
In the case of an IR, the relevant date is the date of registration by the International Bureau or, if the designation takes place at a later stage, the designation date. 
V primeru mednarodne registracije je upoštevni datum datum registracije pri Mednarodnem uradu ali datum imenovanja, če imenovanje poteka pozneje.
Where priority is claimed, the relevant date is the priority date. 
Če se zahteva priznanje prednostne pravice, je upoštevni datum datum priznanja prednostne pravice.
Hereafter, all these dates are referred to as the ‘filing date'. 
V nadaljevanju so vsi ti datumi imenovani „datum vložitve“.
3.1 Examination proceedings 
Postopek preizkušanja
Since a trade mark enjoys protection as of its filing date, and since the filing date of the application for registration determines the priority of one mark over another, a trade mark must be registrable on that date. 
Ker je blagovna znamka zaščitena od datuma vložitve in ker datum vložitve prijave za registracijo določa prednostno pravico ene znamke pred drugo, mora biti možno, da se blagovna znamka registrira na ta datum.
Consequently, the applicant must prove that distinctive character was acquired through use of the trade mark prior to the date of application for registration (11/06/2009, C542/07 P, Pure Digital, EU:C:2009:362, § 49, 51; 07/09/2006, C108/05, Europolis, EU:C:2006:530, § 22). 
Prijavitelj mora zato dokazati, da je bil razlikovalni učinek pridobljen z uporabo blagovne znamke pred datumom vložitve zahteve za registracijo (11/06/2009, C542/07 P, Pure Digital, EU:C:2009:362, § 49, 51; 07/09/2006, C108/05, Europolis, EU:C:2006:530, § 22).
Evidence of use made of the trade mark after this date should not be automatically disregarded, insofar as it may provide indicative information regarding the situation prior to the date of application (28/10/2009, T137/08, Green/Yellow, EU:T:2009:417, § 49). 
Dokazi o uporabi blagovne znamke po tem datumu se ne smejo samodejno prezreti, saj lahko zagotovijo okvirne informacije o razmerah pred datumom prijave (28/10/2009, T137/08, Green/Yellow, EU:T:2009:417, § 49).
3.2 Cancellation proceedings 
Postopek izbrisa
In cancellation proceedings, a trade mark that was registered in breach of the provisions of Article 7(1)(b), (c) or (d) EUTMR may nevertheless no longer be declared invalid if, in consequence of the use that has been made of it, it has, after registration, acquired distinctive character for the goods or services for which it is registered (Article 59(2) EUTMR). 
V postopku izbrisa se blagovna znamka, ki je bila registrirana ob kršitvi določb člena 7(1)(b), (c) ali (d) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, kljub temu ne more razglasiti za nično, če je zaradi uporabe po registraciji pridobila razlikovalen značaj za blago ali storitve, za katere je registrirana (člen 59(2) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU).
The precise purpose of this norm is to maintain the registration of those marks that, due to the use that has been made of them, have in the meantime - that is to say, after their registration and in any event before the application for an invalidity request - acquired distinctive character for the goods or services for which they were registered, in spite of the fact that, when registration took place, they were contrary to Article 7 EUTMR (14/12/2011, T237/10, Clasp lock, EU:T:2011:741, § 52-53, 86; 15/10/2008, T405/05, Manpower, EU:T:2008:442, § 127, 146; 10/12/2008 T365/06, BATEAUX MOUCHES, EU:T:2008:559, § 37-38). 
Natančen namen te določbe je ohranitev registracije tistih znamk, ki so zaradi vmesne uporabe, torej uporabe po registraciji in v vsakem primeru pred zahtevo za ugotovitev ničnosti, pridobile razlikovalen učinek za proizvode ali storitve, za katere so bile registrirane, čeprav je bila ta registracija takrat v nasprotju s členom 7 Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU (14/12/2011, T237/10, Clasp lock, EU:T:2011:741, § 52-53, 86; 15/10/2008, T405/05, Manpower, EU:T:2008:442, § 127, 146; 10/12/2008 T365/06, BATEAUX MOUCHES, EU:T:2008:559, § 37-38).
4 Consumers 
Potrošniki
Distinctive character of a sign, including that acquired through use, must be assessed in relation to the perception of the average consumer for the category of goods or services in question. 
Razlikovalni učinek znaka, vključno s tistim, ki je pridobljen z uporabo, je treba presoditi ob upoštevanju tega, kako kategorijo zadevnih proizvodov ali storitev zaznava povprečen potrošnik.
These consumers are deemed to be reasonably well informed, and reasonably observant and circumspect. 
Domneva se, da so ti potrošniki običajno obveščeni ter razumno pozorni in preudarni.
The definition of the relevant public is linked to an examination of the intended purchasers of the goods or services concerned, since it is in relation to those purchasers that the mark must perform its essential function. 
Opredelitev upoštevne javnosti je povezana s presojo tega, komu so namenjeni zadevni proizvodi ali storitve, saj mora prav v razmerju do njih znamka razviti svojo bistveno funkcijo.
Consequently, such a definition must be arrived at by reference to the essential function of a trade mark, namely to guarantee the identity of the origin of the goods or services covered by the mark to consumers or end users by enabling them, without any possibility of confusion, to distinguish the goods or services from others of another origin (29/09/2010, T378/07, Représentation d'un tracteur en rouge, noir et gris, EU:T:2010:413, § 33, 38). 
Tako je treba takšno opredelitev sprejeti ob upoštevanju bistvene funkcije blagovne znamke, ki potrošniku ali končnemu uporabniku zagotovlja istovetnost izvora z znamko označenega proizvoda ali storitve s tem, da se mu brez verjetne zmede omogoči razlikovanje tega proizvoda ali storitve od tistih, ki imajo drugi izvor (29/09/2010, T378/07, Représentation d'un tracteur en rouge, noir et gris, EU:T:2010:413, § 33, 38).
The relevant consumer includes, therefore, not only persons who have actually purchased the goods and services but also any potentially interested person in the strict sense of prospective purchasers (29/09/2010, T378/07, Représentation d'un tracteur en rouge, noir et gris, EU:T:2010:413, § 41 et seq.). 
Zadevni potrošnik tako ne vključuje samo oseb, ki so dejansko kupile proizvode in storitve, ampak tudi vse potencialno zainteresirane osebe v strogem smislu bodočih kupcev (29/09/2010, T378/07, Représentation d'un tracteur en rouge, noir et gris, EU:T:2010:413, § 41 et seq.).
Who prospective purchasers are is defined depending on the precise product or service for which registration is sought. 
Kdo so bodoči kupci, se opredeli glede na zadevni proizvod ali storitev, za katerega se zahteva registracija.
If the claimed goods or services represent a broad category (for example, bags or watches), it is irrelevant that the actual products offered under the sign are extremely expensive luxury items - the public will include all the prospective purchasers for the goods claimed in the EUTM application, including non-luxury and cheaper items if the claim is for a broad category. 
Če blago ali storitve, za katere se zahteva varstvo, predstavljajo obsežno kategorijo (na primer, torbe ali ure), ni pomembno, da so dejanski proizvodi, ki se ponujajo pod znakom, izredno dragi luksuzni artikli - javnost vključuje vse bodoče kupce proizvodov, za katere se v prijavi blagovne znamke EU zahteva varstvo, vključno z neluksuznimi in cenejšimi artikli, če je vložena zahteva za obsežno kategorijo.
Since the main function of a trade mark is to guarantee the origin of goods and services, acquired distinctiveness must be assessed in respect of the goods and services at issue. 
Ker je glavna funkcija blagovne znamke zagotoviti poreklo blaga in storitev, je treba pridobljeni razlikovalni učinek presoditi glede na zadevno blago in storitve.
Consequently, the applicant's evidence must prove a link between the sign and the goods and services for which the sign is applied for, establishing that the relevant class of persons, or at least a significant proportion thereof, identify the goods and services as originating from a particular undertaking because of the trade mark (04/05/1999, C108/97 & C109/97, Chiemsee, EU:C:1999:230, § 52; 19/05/2009, T211/06, Cybercrédit et al., EU:T:2009:160, § 51). 
Dokazi prijavitelja morajo zato dokazati povezavo med znakom ter blagom in storitvami, za katerega je vložena prijava, ter opredeliti, da zadevni razred oseb ali vsaj njegov znatni delež blago in storitve zaradi blagovne znamke zazna kot blago in storitve, ki izvirajo iz določenega podjetja (04/05/1999, C108/97 & C109/97, Chiemsee, EU:C:1999:230, § 52; 19/05/2009, T211/06, Cybercrédit et al., EU:T:2009:160, § 51).
6 Territorial Aspects 
Ozemeljski vidiki
Pursuant to Article 1 EUTMR, a European Union trade mark has a unitary character and has equal effect throughout the European Union. 
Blagovna znamka Evropske unije ima v skladu s členom 1 Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU enotni značaj in ima enak učinek na celotnem območju Evropske unije.
Accordingly, a mark must be refused registration even if it is devoid of distinctive character only in part of the European Union. 
Glede na to je treba zavrniti registracijo znamke tudi, če je brez razlikovalnega učinka samo v delu Evropske unije.
That part of the European Union may be comprised of a single Member State (22/06/2006, C25/05 P, Bonbonverpackung, EU:C:2006:422, § 81-83; 29/09/2010, T378/07, Représentation d'un tracteur en rouge, noir et gris, EU:T:2010:413 § 45 and the case-law cited). 
Ta del Evropske unije je lahko samo ena država članica (22/06/2006, C25/05 P, Bonbonverpackung, EU:C:2006:422, § 81-83; 29/09/2010, T378/07, Représentation d'un tracteur en rouge, noir et gris, EU:T:2010:413 § 45 in navedena sodna praksa).
As a logical consequence, acquired distinctiveness must be established throughout the territory in which the trade mark did not ab initio have distinctive character (22/06/2006, C25/05 P, Bonbonverpackung, EU:C:2006:422, § 83, 86; 29/09/2010, T378/07, Représentation d'un tracteur en rouge, noir et gris, EU:T:2010:413, § 30). 
Zato mora biti razlikovalni učinek, pridobljen z uporabo, dokazan na vsem ozemlju, kjer naj ga znamka ne bi imela že od začetka (22/06/2006, C25/05 P, Bonbonverpackung, EU:C:2006:422, § 83, 86; 29/09/2010, T378/07, Représentation d'un tracteur en rouge, noir et gris, EU:T:2010:413, § 30).
This may prove difficult and burdensome for the applicant, particularly with regard to three-dimensional or colour marks, where consumer perception of a potential lack of inherent distinctiveness will most likely be the same in each and every Member State of the European Union. 
To se lahko izkaže za zahtevno in obremenjujoče za prijavitelja, zlasti v zvezi s tridimenzionalnimi ali barvnimi znamkami, pri katerih bo potrošnikovo zaznavanje morebitnega neobstoja svojstvenega razlikovalnega učinka najverjetneje enako v vsaki posamezni državi članici Evropske unije.