Home / Case Studies / Melbourne IP Firm (anonymised)
Case study

Melbourne IP Firm Cuts TM Opposition Prep by 65%

7 lawyers, 3 patent/trade mark attorneys
Melbourne, VIC
Trade Marks
Copyright
IP Commercialisation
The outcome

A 7-lawyer Melbourne IP firm uses Quillio for trade mark opposition Statements of Grounds and Particulars, copyright infringement advice, IP licensing review, and examination adverse report responses under the Trade Marks Act 1995. Opposition prep time has dropped by roughly 65%, and the firm now handles double the opposition volume with the same team.

Run the same pilot — free trial
The challenge

What they were trying to solve

Trade mark oppositions filed with IP Australia require a Statement of Grounds and Particulars within 1 month of filing the Notice of Intention to Oppose (reg 5.8 Trade Marks Regulations 1995). Grounds under s44 (deceptive similarity), s60 (reputation), s42(b) (contrary to law), and s62A (bad faith) each require specific evidence frameworks. Building the particulars was partner-heavy work and a drag on throughput.

The solution

Why Quillio

Quillio reads the prior trade mark register search results, the opponent's use evidence, and the applicant's specification, and drafts a first-pass Statement of Grounds and Particulars with each ground mapped to the relevant evidence. Lawyers refine the argument and finalise. Also used for examination adverse report responses under s33 and s41.

Implementation

Pilot across 6 oppositions over 8 weeks, benchmarked against the partners' manual drafting. Rolled out to the full IP team, extended to licensing and commercialisation agreements in month 3.

Results

Measurable outcomes

6h → 2h
Opposition Statement drafting

For a standard s44/s60 opposition with two grounds and particulars

2x
Opposition volume handled

Team now handles double the opposition matter volume without added headcount

Down 55%
Adverse report responses

Examination response time under s33/s41 Trade Marks Act

3h → 1h
IP licence review time

Standard IP licence with royalty, termination and improvements review

+40%
Partner focus time

Partners now spend more time on strategic IP advisory and less on drafting particulars

"
"Opposition particulars is a structure exercise — the arguments are there, you just have to map them. Quillio does the mapping in minutes and I argue the close cases. We've doubled our opposition work without anyone staying late."
Anaya S.
Partner, IP · Melbourne IP Firm (anonymised)
In their day

How it works in practice

Trade mark opposition Statements of Grounds and Particulars under reg 5.8, examination adverse report responses under s33 and s41 Trade Marks Act 1995, copyright infringement advice, IP licensing review, and domain name UDRP responses.

What they avoided

Declining opposition work in busy quarters, outsourcing particulars drafting to counsel at margin-eroding rates, or adding a junior solicitor the firm did not need for the long-term IP advisory pipeline.

Questions

Case study FAQs

Does Quillio cover all opposition grounds?

Yes — Quillio handles the full suite of s44, s58, s58A, s60, s42(b), s43, s62, and s62A Trade Marks Act 1995 grounds, with evidence frameworks appropriate to each.

What about copyright infringement?

Yes — Quillio advises on Copyright Act 1968 infringement including substantial part analysis under s14, the safe harbour provisions, and damages and account of profits elections.

Can it review IP licences?

Yes — Quillio reviews IP licences for royalty structure, territory and field of use, improvements ownership, termination and post-termination use, warranties, indemnities, and competition law risk under Part IV CCA.

Does it handle patent work?

For IP law firm advice on patent infringement, licensing, and opposition — yes. Quillio is not a substitute for a patent attorney's specification drafting, which is a registered practitioner function.

How does it handle trade mark examination?

Quillio reads the adverse report, identifies the grounds (usually s33 or s41), searches for conflicting marks, and drafts a response with arguments and any necessary evidence of acquired distinctiveness.

Run the same pilot.

IP firms should trial Quillio on their next two oppositions and measure drafting time and argument quality. Start a free trial.

Start your free trial