Intellectual property · Trademark examination · Romania

An OSIM trademark refusal in Romania can arrive when packaging, a website or a product launch is already under way.

Before changing the brand or sending a quick reply, establish exactly what the office has communicated, what it objects to and which procedural step remains available.

This guide is for businesses and foreign applicants responding to objections in a Romanian national trademark application.

It focuses on OSIM’s examination response and the next steps after refusal.

The legislative references below use Law no. 84/1998 as republished in Official Gazette no. 277 of 7 April 2026.

In this national procedure, “provisional refusal” refers to the examination objection notice called aviz de refuz provizoriu in Article 17¹(4) of the implementing regulation.

A third-party opposition, an EUIPO refusal and a Madrid-system notification need their own procedural assessment.

For the initial filing process, see our separate guide to registering a trademark in Romania.

What should you check first in the OSIM communication?

Identify the document and procedural stage before drafting the reply.

Collect every page and attachment, the envelope or electronic delivery record, the application number and earlier correspondence.

A screenshot of the first page can omit the objection’s reasoning, a request for documents or the relevant instructions.

Separate a request to correct missing application information from a provisional refusal following examination and from a reasoned refusal decision.

Record the issuing date and the evidence of communication separately.

Ask who received it: the applicant, an existing representative or an address previously designated for the proceedings.

Internal forwarding to a manager should not be treated as automatically starting a fresh period.

Then check whether the objection concerns the whole specification or particular goods or services.

Compare the communication with the actual filed wording and representation of the mark.

The name used in advertising may differ from the sign submitted to OSIM.

A response prepared for the marketing version can leave the filed application’s problem unanswered.

Which deadline applies to an examination response?

The examination response period and the challenge period are separate.

Under Article 17¹(4)–(5) of the implementing regulation, a provisional refusal invites a response within 30 days.

The procedure provides one additional 30-day period on request with the statutory fee; the request and payment evidence must be filed before the initial period expires under the applicable submission rules.

It does not provide automatic or successive rolling extensions.

Article 25(2) of Law no. 84/1998 is the corresponding statutory provision.

Under Article 8(1)–(4) of the implementing regulation, the period runs from receipt of the communication by the applicant or representative, as applicable, rather than simply from the notice’s issue date.

Day-based periods count calendar days, excluding the starting and expiry days; an expiry falling on a public holiday or non-working day moves to the end of the next working day.

For procedural documents sent by post, Article 8(4) treats handover to the post office before expiry as timely submission.

Keep proof of receipt and timely filing, and check the rules for the submission channel actually used.

Ask for a written deadline assessment tied to the actual communication and the applicable calculation rules.

Distinguish the last day for filing from the internal date for approving arguments, arranging translations and obtaining a mandate.

A notice period can be consumed quickly if the applicant and its records are in different countries.

Do not treat a telephone discussion, an informal request for clarification or a message saying that evidence will follow as an extension.

Confirm the proper submission route and preserve the filing acknowledgement.

If time is already short, send the complete notice for review immediately rather than waiting to assemble a perfect commercial history.

Under Article 17¹(6)–(8), a missing or unsuccessful response may lead to admission with a restricted specification or refusal, depending on the grounds and file.

If a response period has already been missed, obtain an urgent assessment of the procedural position and any available remedy.

This comparison is a reading aid, not a deadline calculator.

Review the complete document and applicable law before deciding what to file.

Why can the office object to the proposed mark?

Start with the exact ground cited in the notice.

Article 5 of the Trademark Law covers absolute refusal grounds, including lack of distinctiveness, customary or descriptive signs, deception and protected symbols.

The appropriate response depends on the ground and requested goods or services.

Third-party observations concern absolute grounds and do not make their author a party to examination, under Article 20.

An opposition based on relative grounds follows the separate Articles 26–28 opposition procedure.

For descriptive wording, examine what the expression communicates to the relevant customers in relation to the specified activity.

A term can describe a feature, intended purpose or geographic origin for one product while raising a different question for another.

Explain that relationship precisely; stating that the brand is important to the business does not address the examiner’s reasoning.

Read the sign as filed.

If the application contains both wording and graphical elements, identify what the overall presentation contributes to the argument.

An intention to introduce a distinctive design later does not supply a graphical element missing from the pending application.

Keep proposed future branding separate from the assessment of the existing file.

Do not reduce every refusal to a distinctiveness dispute.

An objection concerning a misleading claim, a protected designation or an official symbol requires a different analysis and potentially different evidence.

A response should address every outstanding ground, rather than concentrating on the easiest paragraph in the notice.

Will the company name, domain or foreign registration help?

Those records can provide context, but they do not settle Romanian trademark registrability.

OSIM’s trademark guidance distinguishes company-name and domain registration from trademark protection.

A name accepted for a company can still encounter a trademark objection.

If you have a foreign registration, give counsel the actual certificate or registry extract, the representation of the sign and its goods or services.

Identify whether the Romanian application concerns the same wording and scope.

Present the record as part of the factual background and assess its relevance to the particular ground; avoid presenting it as automatic approval for the Romanian file.

For brand teams, this distinction helps separate two decisions: whether to pursue the requested registration and whether to keep using the commercial name.

Launch expenditure, distributor commitments and domain ownership matter to the business choice, but should be set out in a separate commercial note alongside the legal arguments.

Can evidence of use support a distinctiveness argument?

Potentially, where the statutory route applies.

Article 5(2)–(3) allows acquired distinctiveness for Article 5(1)(b), (c) and (d): lack of distinctiveness, customary signs and descriptive signs.

The provisions cover distinctiveness acquired before filing and, under Article 5(3), after filing but before registration.

Its relevance and proof require a file-specific assessment; use does not cure every refusal ground.

That route does not cure the shape or characteristic exclusions in Article 5(1)(e), deception under (f), or public-order and morality objections under (m).

Build an evidence index explaining what each record demonstrates.

Useful material to assess may include dated packaging, catalogues, sales records, advertising campaigns, geographical distribution and reliable information about customer recognition.

These are potential evidence categories, not a statutory checklist or an assurance that a particular document will be sufficient.

For each item, identify the date, territory, goods or services, applicant or user of the sign and version of the mark shown.

Separate activity outside Romania from evidence relevant to the Romanian assessment.

Explain gaps rather than combining unrelated screenshots into a large attachment and expecting their significance to be obvious.

Trading under a name and showing that customers identify it as a commercial origin are different evidential questions.

A large turnover figure may need context, such as the products concerned and how the sign appeared to buyers.

Ask counsel to assess the argument before commissioning research or collecting sensitive business records at considerable cost.

Can narrowing the specification resolve the objection?

A restriction is worth assessing if it leaves useful commercial protection.

Article 30 permits restrictions and limited corrections, while substantial changes require a new application.

Review the proposed wording before filing it.

Under Article 7(2), an absolute refusal ground affecting only some goods or services leads to refusal for those goods or services.

Map the affected terms before treating an objection as covering the whole application.

Article 22 also addresses an OSIM-requested declaration disclaiming exclusivity in a nonessential nondistinctive element where its statutory conditions are met.

Such a declaration is not a universal cure for descriptive branding, and a voluntary declaration is disregarded where those conditions are absent, under Article 17¹(13).

Prepare a comparison showing the original specification, affected terms, proposed wording and business activities that would remain covered.

Avoid casually removing an entire class when the real issue concerns a narrower activity.

Conversely, do not retain broad wording merely because it was inexpensive to include if it keeps the objection unresolved.

Ask the operational team which products are already sold, which are about to launch and which are speculative future plans.

A restriction can be commercially sensible for one applicant and unacceptable for another.

The instruction should make those priorities visible before a representative submits wording that changes the protection sought.

A new name, a redesigned logo or an expanded goods list belongs in a separate filing assessment where the changes exceed the pending application’s limits.

Compare the new sign, scope, filing date, applicable priority position and fresh costs.

Refiling should never be described as automatically carrying forward the old application’s position.

How should the response be organised?

Use a reasoned response that answers the notice point by point.

Begin with the applicant and application identifiers, the communication being answered and a clear statement of the requested outcome.

Follow the examiner’s grounds in a consistent order so each argument can be connected to the relevant part of the file.

Separate legal analysis from evidence and commercial background.

Where the response proposes an admissible restriction, reproduce the exact revised specification and explain its relationship to the objection.

Where it relies on existing use, cross-reference the evidence index rather than repeating unsupported claims about reputation.

Check names, application numbers, the filed representation, dates, attachments, signatures and mandate details before submission.

Resolve language and translation needs early.

Retain the final submitted version, proof of payment where required and the acknowledgement of filing together, so a later review does not rely on an unsubmitted draft.

Use the builder below to distinguish records already available from questions still open.

Its output is a preliminary brief for counsel.

Marking an item documented does not establish its authenticity, legal relevance or sufficiency, and selecting a notice category does not classify the actual OSIM document.

What changes after OSIM issues a refusal decision?

Review the decision as a new procedural step.

Article 106(1) provides a 30-day challenge to OSIM from communication, with the statutory fee.

Under Article 108(1), the commission’s decision can be challenged at the Bucharest Tribunal within 30 days of communication.

The Tribunal’s judgment may be challenged by an ordinary appeal to the Bucharest Court of Appeal.

Article 50 of the implementing regulation addresses the written Romanian-language challenge, grounds, signature, supporting documents, fee evidence and relevant mandate.

Check the applicable requirements against the file.

An informal disagreement with an examiner is not a substitute for preparing the appropriate challenge.

Compare the refusal’s reasons with the response actually filed.

Identify which arguments were considered, which points remain disputed and whether the application’s commercially essential scope can still be defended.

A challenge assessment should explain the available case and its evidential limits, together with the cost and commercial consequences of proceeding.

The OSIM Trademark Appeals Commission page publishes procedural information about its work.

Check the actual file and official communications for your case.

Public schedules do not replace communication evidence or establish that a filing deadline has been preserved.

What should foreign applicants and brand teams prepare?

Confirm the applicant and authorised representation before the deadline becomes urgent.

Under Article 15(2), representation is compulsory when the applicant has no domicile, registered office or effective and functioning industrial or commercial establishment in the EU or EEA, except for filing the registration application.

Law no. 30/2024 amended Article 3(j) so that an authorised representative includes a lawyer or an industrial-property adviser.

Under Article 6(2) of the implementing regulation, an unrepresented applicant without the relevant domicile, office or establishment in Romania must designate a correspondence address in Romania.

Check mandates, signatory authority, language and communication arrangements early.

Identify the legal entity that owns the application, even if a different group company markets the products.

Give counsel the entity’s accurate name and registration details, the person providing instructions and any existing representative.

Avoid parallel submissions by the marketing team, headquarters and a local adviser without an agreed lead for the file.

Assign internal responsibility for approving the response, obtaining records, paying confirmed fees and monitoring further communications.

A practical timetable should show dependencies and leave time for a final consistency check.

The legal route and evidence should be settled before arranging optional specialist work.

Check OSIM’s official trademark legislation and fee resources for the applicable charge and payment instructions.

Separate official fees from professional fees, translations and evidence preparation.

Under Article 7 of Government Ordinance no. 41/1998, Romanian natural and legal persons pay the statutory fees in lei, foreign natural and legal persons pay in euros, and fees jointly owed by Romanian and foreign applicants or holders are paid in euros.

Confirm the applicable payment currency and current OSIM instructions for the applicant before paying.

A fee table’s description should not be used by itself to determine a statutory response period.

Illustrative scenario: descriptive wording and a planned launch

How Atrium can assist with an OSIM refusal review

A defined review through our Romanian trademark legal services can connect the notice, procedural stage, filed sign and commercial priorities.

The scope may cover the objections, available arguments and evidence, an admissible specification change, a response or challenge, and the representation needed for submission.

Send the full communication and attachments, delivery evidence, application, goods or services list, earlier submissions and relevant payments.

Identify any known deadline immediately.

Add a short note explaining what the business needs to protect and whether alternative wording or a new design is commercially acceptable.

Sensitive records should follow an agreed sharing channel.

Sending a notice or using the contact form does not suspend or extend any procedural deadline.

Responsibility for a filing or deadline must be expressly agreed when Atrium accepts the engagement and confirms its scope.

Agree the scope and fee before work begins.

A useful work product is a document-specific assessment and an action sequence showing what the applicant, counsel and internal team each need to do.

A review cannot guarantee registration, success in a challenge or a particular completion date.

Related Guides and Services

Frequently Asked Questions

Review the notice before choosing the next move

Bring the complete OSIM communication, delivery evidence and application together first.

Atrium can assess the procedural stage, objections and response options against the protection your business needs, then define the documents and decisions required for the next step.

AI-assisted content.