Company newsLocation:Home - News - Company news

Beijing Fineland IP Firm Becomes the Agency of the Case of Review of“宇杰骏驰”Trademark Rejection and Successfully Protects Rights.

The applicant, Beijing Ningjie Junchi Technology Co., Ltd., refused to accept the trademark rejection decision issued by the CNIPA, entrusted Beijing Fineland IP Firm to apply for the rejection review to the CNIPA in accordance with the law, and finally succeeded in defending its rights.

 Brief description of the case:

The application trademark is a series of trademarks carefully made by the applicant. The trademark related to the applied trademark logo under the name of the applicant has passed the preliminary examination or has been successfully registered, indicating that the applied trademark is originally created by the applicant and has significant characteristics, so it shall be preliminarily examined and approved and announced.

 Trademark contrast picture:


The application trademark is carefully designed by the applicant, which is highly original and unrepeatable. The application trademark takes the Chinese character “宁杰骏驰” as the significant identification part and the call content. Cited trademarks 1 and 2 are the single graph composition, with the graph as the significant identification part. In the call, because the public understanding is different, the call is not clear.

The application trademark takes the text “宁杰骏驰” as the significant identification part, the meaning is clear and strong, and the figure in the logo plays the role of background and modification. The graphic part is composed of two prototype parts, "a planet and a running white horse", and the following text “宁杰骏驰” is taken from the name of the applicant, which has a clear reference. The application trademark conveys the applicant's endless and never-ending spirit of struggle. The citation trademark 1 is composed of simple graphics. The graphics are based on "Zhaoyang, Highway and cars". The meaning of cited trademark 1 is that the right holder has vitality, is full of hope, and develops itself at the speed of lightning. The cited trademark 2 is composed of simple graphics, and the graphics part is based on "planets and auspicious clouds". The cited trademark 2 conveys the spirit of the obligee to explore the unknown and the desire for their own luck and good luck.

It can be seen that the application trademark and the cited trademarks have different source and representative meanings, and the composition details of the composition and the overall appearance are obviously different, which will not cause confusion and misidentification by the public at all, and does not constitute a similar trademark.

The Guide to Trademark Examination and Trial stipulates that if the graphics of the trademark are the same or similar, which is easy for the relevant public to confuse the source of the goods or services, it shall be judged to be a similar trademark. However, if the graphics contained in the trademark are commonly used patterns of the commodity, or mainly play the role of decoration and background, and are less significant in the trademark, and the overall meaning, call or appearance of the trademark is obvious, which is not easy for the relevant public to confuse the source of the commodity or service, it shall not be judged as a similar trademark.

In this case, the pattern part of the application trademark only plays a decorative role, and the significance in the trademark is weak. Each trademark has obvious differences in the overall meaning, call and appearance, and fully conforms to the circumstances mentioned in the proviso part of the above examination and trial guidelines. Accordingly, it shall be determined that the applied trademark and the cited trademark 1 and 2 do not constitute a similar form.

To sum up, the graphic elements contained in the application trademark only play the role of modification and background in the overall logo. Based on the significant recognition text in the application trademark, the overall difference between the application trademark and the cited trademarks presented in a single figure is significant, which will not cause confusion and misidentification of the relevant public at all, and does not constitute a similar trademark.

In accordance with the provisions of Article 28 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China, the CNIPA has decided as follows: The application for the registration of the application trademark in the review service shall be preliminarily examined and approved.