How to File a Trademark Opposition at the DOI: Format, Contents and Mechanics
How to file a trademark opposition at the DOI in Nepal: the 90-day window, the written format, the grounds and exhibits, the fee, and what happens after filing.
A conflicting application has published in the Industrial Property Bulletin and the clock is running — roughly 90 days from publication to oppose. What the opposition actually consists of, in format and in filing, is less written about than the window itself.
The mechanics are deliberately parliamentary: a written filing, stated grounds, attached evidence, a fee. The papers are the case.
In short
To file a trademark opposition at the DOI in Nepal, submit a written opposition at the Industrial Property Section within roughly 90 days of the application's Bulletin publication, stating numbered grounds under the PDTA — principally Section 18(1) similarity (including across English and Devanagari scripts) and prior rights, plus non-distinctiveness, descriptiveness and bad faith — with each ground pinned to exhibits: prior registrations, dated use records, comparison charts. Anyone with real grounds has standing. The applicant is then put to answer, the exchange proceeds on the papers, and the Department issues a written decision with appeal rights thereafter.
Filing a trademark opposition at the DOI: window and forum
Two facts frame everything. First, the window: an opposition must be filed within roughly 90 days of the application's publication in the Industrial Property Bulletin — counted from the publication date, converted from Bikram Sambat to AD with care. Second, the forum: the filing goes to the Department of Industry's Industrial Property Section, in writing.
Standing is practically generous in Nepal — anyone may oppose an accepted application. What the DOI weighs is not who you are but whether your grounds are real and evidenced.
Building the opposition file, step by step
Fix the publication date and count the window
Read the publication date from the Bulletin entry, convert BS to AD once, and diarise an internal filing deadline at least a week before expiry. A watch that reaches you on day 85 gives you a dilemma, not a case.
Choose grounds you can evidence
The working set: Section 18(1) similarity including cross-script sound-alikes, earlier rights, lack of distinctiveness, descriptiveness, bad faith. Two strong grounds beat five thin ones.
Assemble the exhibits
Your earlier registration certificates; dated evidence of use in Nepal; a side-by-side comparison exhibit with transliterated forms aligned; any pattern evidence for bad faith. Every factual claim gets an exhibit.
Draft the grounds statement
Numbered grounds, each traceable to a registrability rule and pinned to the exhibit that carries it. Calm, precise, documented — the persuasive register in Kathmandu.
File with the prescribed fee
The opposition is filed with the fee applicable under current DOI practice — confirm the current rate at filing. Keep the stamped copy; it dates your filing.
What a well-formed opposition contains
The formatting principle behind the table: the examiner decides from what is filed. Exhibits must speak for themselves, Nepali documents should need no translation for the officer reading them, and nothing important should live only in prose.
| Component | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Particulars of the opposed application | Identifies the file: application and record numbers, Bulletin issue, class, mark |
| Standing and interest | Who you are and why the application harms your position |
| Grounds, numbered | Each ground tied to a registrability rule under the PDTA |
| Exhibit list | Registrations, use evidence, comparison exhibits — self-explanatory without narration |
| Requested outcome | Refusal of the opposed application |
What happens after the opposition is filed
The application is frozen; the applicant is put to answer. The exchange proceeds on written submissions, with the Department able to request further material or convene a hearing where required. The decision issues in writing — refusing the application or allowing it to proceed — with appeal routes to the Revenue Tribunal and the courts thereafter.
Your calendar stays live after filing too: keep the underlying prior registrations renewed (an opposition grounded on a mark that lapses mid-proceeding is a self-inflicted defeat), respond to evidence requests promptly, and track the applicant's answer deadline.
The formatting failures that cost real oppositions
- Window missed by conversion error — a BS/AD slip at a month boundary is unrecoverable
- Grounds without exhibits — assertions the examiner cannot verify are weightless
- Transliteration missing — cross-script similarity is unreadable without the romanised forms in the record
- Everything-in-the-annex filings — five weak grounds bury the two strong ones
- A lapsed prior mark — the ground dies the day the registration does
Want this handled for your brand?
IP Watch monitors new trademark publications in Nepal and alerts you to potentially conflicting marks — with the context needed to review them.
This article is general information, not legal advice.