Giulia Panigazzi is a member of Carnelutti’s IP department. She is specialized in intellectual property with a focus on litigation matters relating to patents, trade secrets, trademarks and other distinctive signs, domain names, designs and models, copyright and unfair competition.
She also assists clients in drafting and negotiating commercial agreements, including assignment and licencing of intellectual property rights, agreements relating to the development of new technologies, distribution, franchising and supply agreements.
Prior to joining Carnelutti, Giulia worked for a prestigious Italian boutique firm specialized in intellectual property.
Giulia graduated from the University of Pavia in 2016.
She was admitted to the Italian Bar Association in 2020.
In 2022, she obtained an LL.M degree in Intellectual Property from the WIPO and the University of Turin.
She is fluent in English, in addition to her native Italian.
Giulia Panigazzi, along with Margherita Barié, co-authored the article “General Court provides guidance on what constitutes proof of reputation of earlier mark” published on WTR Daily.
In Atomico Investment Holdings Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (Case T‑98/23, 28 February 2024), the General Court has ruled against Atomico Investment Holdings Ltd (‘the applicant’), owner of the earlier ATOMICO trademarks, in favour of Augusto Gomes Tominaga and his application for the following EU trademark…
This article first appeared in WTR Daily, part of World Trademark Review, in (month/year). For further information, please go to www.worldtrademarkreview.com
Giulia Panigazzi, along with Margherita Barié, co-authored the article Battle of the dachshunds: figurative and word elements of composite marks may be co-dominant published on WTR Daily. In the assessment of similarity, the figurative element of a composite mark may be considered to be as distinctive and dominant as the word element. On 25 October 2023 in Case T‑773/22, the General Court ruled in favour of Italian clothing company Harmont & Blaine SpA, upholding the decisions of the Opposition Division and the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO.
This article first appeared in WTR Daily, part of World Trademark Review, in (month/year). For further information, please go to www.worldtrademarkreview.com
