How to Reply to a Trademark Examination Report in India: Complete Step-by-Step Guide (2026)

A Trademark Examination Report (TER) is a formal document issued by the Trade Marks Examiner at IP India after reviewing your application. It may: (1) Approve your mark for publication in the Trade Marks Journal — no reply needed; (2) Raise objections that you must address before approval; or (3) Conditionally approve subject to amendments. The report is sent electronically — accessible on the IP India portal under your application number. Monitor your status regularly at ipindiaonline.gov.in.

Absolute Grounds Objections (Section 9) — the mark itself has an inherent problem: descriptive of the goods/services; generic or common trade term; deceptively misdescriptive; a geographical name used alone; a common personal name or surname; devoid of any distinctive character.

Relative Grounds Objections (Section 11) — conflict with an existing mark: an identical or deceptively similar mark already exists in the same class; the existing mark is a well-known trademark and your mark may dilute it; likelihood of confusion among consumers in the marketplace.

To overcome a descriptiveness or distinctiveness objection: (1) Acquired Distinctiveness — provide evidence the mark has become distinctive through use (invoices, sales figures, advertisements, social media metrics, newspaper coverage); (2) Coined Word Argument — argue the mark is an invented word with no pre-existing meaning in the trade; (3) Combination Mark — argue that while individual elements may be descriptive, the combination as a whole is distinctive; (4) Prior Registrations — cite similar marks already registered in India or internationally as evidence of registrability; (5) Disclaimer — offer to disclaim the descriptive element while protecting the distinctive part.

When the examiner finds a similar existing mark: (1) Distinguish the marks — argue the marks are visually, phonetically, and conceptually different; even small differences can be decisive if the overall impression is distinct; (2) Different goods or services — argue that even if marks are similar, the goods/services are distinct enough that confusion is unlikely; (3) Consent letter — if the existing mark owner agrees, a formal No Objection Certificate (NOC) is the strongest possible reply; (4) Prior use — if you have been using your mark longer than the cited mark, provide dated evidence; (5) Different trade channels — argue goods/services are sold through different channels to different customers.

If your written reply does not satisfy the examiner, a Hearing will be scheduled. Online hearings (video conference) are now standard. You or your attorney appear before the Hearing Officer, present arguments verbally, and submit documentary evidence. The Hearing Officer issues a reasoned written decision. If decided against you, an appeal can be filed before the Intellectual Property Division of the relevant High Court.