25. If he does not furnish them, the Ministry rejects the application, giving the reasons therefor.

Art. 29. The Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Labor must act on a filed application for patent within a period of two months.

In case an application has been left without further action thereon, or has been rejected, (See Arts. 27 and 28), the applicant has the right to file a complaint against the decision of the Ministry within a time limit of two months from the date of the notice of rejection with the Sofia Court of Appeals, which before giving its decision may hear the opinion of experts.

In no case whatever will the first tax paid be refunded.

Art. 30. When an application relates to an invention of general public utility, the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Labor transmits the specification to the proper Ministry, which must within a time limit of three months decide whether or not it intends to use the invention after properly compensating the applicant.

If within the above time limit the Ministry does not reply, such action will be construed to mean that it does not wish to use the invention.

Art. 31. Patents are granted without a previous examination and without a government guarantee for the existence, novelty, operation, or the nature of the invention, or its correspondence to the specification filed by the applicant.

Patents are granted by a decree of the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Labor, establishing the regularity of the application, drawings, and other accessories enumerated in Art. 24.

Art. 32. The Division of Commerce ard Industry keeps a register of the patents showing the subject

of the invention, the name, profession, and place of residence of the owner of the patent or his attorney, the date and the hour of filing the application and every change affecting the ownership of the patent and its existence.

In the same register there is recorded the cancellation, or annulling of the patent, enacted through a decision of the court, as well as the rights of use acquired through court proceedings, after notification that the court decision has entered into force.

Clerks of the court are obliged to send to the Ministry of Commerce, Industry, and Labor, without revenue stamps certified copies of the decision on all questions affecting patents immediately after they go into effect.

Art. 33. After recording it in the register, the Ministry of Commerce, Industry, and Labor, publishes the subject matter of the patent according to serial numbers with the date, name, profession, place of residence of the owner of the patent, as well as of his attorney. It also publishes in the same manner each cancellation or revocation of the patent, as well as each change affecting the ownership of the patent.

The Ministry may print and sell at reasonable rates the specifications of the patented inventions together with the necessary drawings and charts. This printing and sale of the specification of the patented invention may upon the request of the owner be postponed for a period of one year. In such a case the provisions of Art. 35 shall not apply.

Art. 34. The publications provided for by the present law are made in a bulletin which is issued periodically by the Ministry of

Commerce, Industry, and Labor.

Art. 35. Any person may be furnished information and copies of the specifications, drawings, models, etc., which are the grounds for the granting of the patent, with the exception of the cases provided for by Art. 33.

The expenses and rates for copies and other parts will be fixed according to rules.

Art. 36. Each transfer of right to use as well as every change affecting the existence of ownership and use of a patent, must be recorded briefly in the special register of the Division of Commerce and Industry within three months beginning from the day such action was taken. If these transfers have not been recorded' they will be considered as null and void with respect to other rightful

Owners.

Each recording is subject to a tax of 25 leva.

PENAL PROVISIONS.

Art. 37. Any person who either intentionally or through gross negligence utilizes an invention infringing the provisions of Arts. 6 and 7 of the present law, is hereby compelled to pay for the loss suffered by the patentee.

If an invention relates to some means for the manufacture of a new product. any product of the same nature will be considered, unless the contrary is proven, as made according to the patented means.

Art. 38. Any person who intentionally uses an invention infringing Arts. 6 and 7 of the present law, is punishable by a fine not to exceed 5000 leva and by imprisonment up to 6 months, or by one only of the two penalties.

Art. 39. A criminal prosecution

may be instituted by a petition from the injured person.

A suit may be withdrawn at any time.

Art. 40.

Civil cases according

to the present law must terminate within a time limit of three years for each separate case.

Art. 41. The Criminal Court, in deciding cases concerning infringements of Arts. 6 and 7 of the present law, renders its decision also on the objections made by the individual accused and based on the abolishment, revocation, or the ownership of the patent, which is the subject of the dispute.

Such decisions concern only the criminal liability.

Art. 42. The court with which a civil or criminal suit has been filed for infringements of a patent, may order the taking of proper protection measures.

It may specially enact that a detailed description be prepared of the products which are stated to have been manufactured as an infringement of the provisions of this law, of the installations, machines, implements, methods, etc., which have been used for that purpose; it may also issue an injunction or sequestration with regard to these various articles in conformity with the Art. 557 of the Civil Law and the following Articles.

In the latter case the court may require the plaintiff to present a fixed guarantee in advance.

Art. 43. In case of a Civil or Criminal sentence, the court may order the confiscation and sale or destruction of the products made by infringing the provisions of the present law, as well as the destruction of the installations, machines, implements, materials, etc., which have served for that purpose.

From the sum realized from the

sale, shall be deducted the fine and court expenses, the balance shall be applied toward paying the damages, and any excess shall be turned over to the owner of the mentioned articles.

Even in case of acquittal the court may, if it finds it necessary, order the destruction of the installations, machines, implements, and materials, which have served exclusively for infringing the proviIsions of the law.

Art. 44. Goods or products, which have been made by infringing the provisions of the present law, as well as the installations, machines, implements, materials, etc., which have served exclusively for carrying on the criminal act, may be ordered by the Criminal Court to be given to the injured party, provided the convicted person is their owner and if the injured person has instituted a civil suit for damages and agrees to accept the above said articles as a full or partial payment of such damages.

Art. 45. Any person who places on the products, or their wrappers, or commercial papers of any kind, intended to be used by a great number of people, or on other means of advertising and publicity, signs which may create a false belief that the objects described thereby are protected by a patent, is punishable by a fine up to 1,000 leva and by imprisonment up to 1 month. or by only one of these two punishments.

Art. 46. All suits for damages instituted under the present law are under the jurisdiction of the District Court at Sofia and are heard according to the short method of Court procedure.

SPECIAL PROVISIONS.

Art. 47. All privileges or patents granted under a special law, may, during the period of protection, be confirmed by patent, in conformity with the provisions of this law.

If such confirmation has not been requested within a period of one year from the publication of this law, the above mentioned privileges and patents shall be considered null and void.

The period of protection starts with the going into effect of the For corresponding special law. payment of taxes the first year shall begin with the date of the filing of the application made according to the provisions of this

law.

Art. 48. For the execution of the present law there shall be created at the Ministry of Commerce, Industry, and Labor a Bureau of Industrial Property, the positions in which shall be fixed in the budget according to the needs. This Bureau shall also be charged with service of registering trademarks.

Art. 49. The manner of filing, the form, the size of the papers and the memoranda, the presentation of other parts, besides those mentioned in the present law will be established in a special regulation, and if it be necessary, the manner of writing up the descriptions and advertising the patents, and, in general, all that refers to the execution of the present law.

Chile

Renewal of a Patent of Invention

In accordance with Supreme Decree No. 2079, dated October 7. 1920, the petition for the exten

sion of patents for a new term must be published in the same form as if it were a question of an application that is being formulated for the first time, and it must remain subject for a period of thirty days to such oppositions as may be lodged.

As regards the first petition that has been presented in such sense, and the carrying out of the regulatory provision mentioned, we copy the following notice, evidencing its fulfillment:

"In accordance with what was ordered by Supreme Decree No. 2079, dated October 7, 1920, of the Ministry of Industry, notice is given to the public that Mr. Francisco Fido Fontana, denizen of Curityba, Brazil, proprietor of patent of invention No. 2449, granted

with the total term of 11 years, under date of January 28, 1911, has presented himself before the Supreme Government, petitioning the renewal of said patent for a new term of ten years.

"The title or subject matter of this patent is:

"A double container, of canvas and wood, for the transportation of Yerba Mate.

"Those that shall have any opposition or reclamation to formulate, shall make it within the term of 30 days, counting from this date.

"Santiago, July 21, 1921. (Signed)

CHIEF OF THE PATENT OFFICE. (Translation from 4 La Propiedad Industrial, Santiago de Chile, No. 37.)"

An important ruling regarding the registration of trade marks in Cuba has just been made by Secretary Collantes, of the Department of Agriculture, Commerce and Labor, protecting against appropriation by persons of the trade marks of well-known manufactures which have been recognized and registered in another country.

The following is a full copy of the resolution:

RESOLUTION.

In re the petition presented by Rafael D. Lorie in his capacity of Director of the International Drug Store Company in regard to registering a trade mark for distinguishing the pharmaceutical product to

be sold in the form of powder, etc., under the name of "Aspirina," petition bearing the number 17683 in the General Register of this Department of Agriculture, Commerce and Labor; and inasmuch as Lorenzo S. Ruiz, in his capacity of attorney of the Bayer Company, Inc., has solicited that the American trade mark No. 18528 be entered in the General Register of this Department of Agriculture, Commerce and Labor, request reiterated by Ricardo More, having the same capacity with relation to the above interested parties;

Whereas, This department on the 23d of last August resolved to at once act upon the mentioned petitions in view of the reasons ad

duced by Ricardo More as attorney for The Bayer Company, Inc., and inasmuch as the trade mark in question protects a medicinal product of large consumption, and with the view of averting that similar products be consumed, confounding them wtih the original one;

Whereas, According to the report of the official charged with examining such petitions, the only one thus far presented clashing with the American registered trade mark No. 106200, belonging to The Bayer Company, Inc., is that of the Director of the International Drug Store Company.

Whereas, The Bureau of Trade Marks advises that with the approval of the Section of Trademarks and Patents, the petition of the International Drug Store Company in regard to the registry of the word "Aspirina" as a a trade mark be denied, because this word is a general term, and therefore can not be registered as a distinction, arcording to the provision in the addition to Article 5, Royal Decree of August 21, 1884.

Whereas, In the judgment of the undersigned, the above conclusion is not exact, since it is not based on any proven or notoriously recognized fact, nor on any authorized report to that end, and hence the word "Aspirina" cannot be considered as a generic term.

Whereas, As further proof, in the document presented on November 8, 1920, by Lorenz S. Ruiz, attorney for The Bayer Company, Inc., soliciting the registry of the aforesaid American trade mark, it appears duly proven by the accompanying certificate issued by the Patent Office at Washington, D. C., that the word "Aspirina" is the property of said company, having been formally registered in its fa

Whereas, The petition of Rafael D. Lorie, Director of the International Drug Store Company, has been opportunely rebutted by Ricardo More, attorney for The Bayer Company, Inc., presenting documents proving that since the year 1917 the company represented by him has exploited the trade mark "Aspirina" for designating a pharmaceutical product, exploitation and designation known to the International Drug Store Company long before its Director, the said Lorie, solicited the registry of the word "Aspirina" for distinguishing one of its products.

Whereas, The registry of a commercial or industrial trade mark should be denied when it has been in use before such a petition is made, and when the petitioner has knowledge of the ownership and use of the trade mark in any of the countries that subscribed the Buenos Aires International Agreement of August 20, 1910, still in force, and in conformity with what is determined in cases A and B. Article 9, of said agreement, all of which apply to the present case.

Whereas, Article 11 of the Buenos Aires International Agreement establishes that: "Questions arising with respect to priority of right, or adoption of a commercial or industrial trade mark, shall be