CPA Wins Trademark Opposition Review Cases & Gains Recognition of Well-known Mark for Japanese Client

 
China Patent Agent (H.K.) Ltd. (CPA) recently won a series of trademark opposition review cases on behalf of its Japanese client Hitachi Maxell, Ltd. as the opponent, and on top of that, gained well-known trademark status for the client's "maxell" trademark.
 
In practice the recognition of well-known mark status is very difficult to obtain, as it calls for presentation of massive evidence regarding the use of the mark, as well as strong arguments for the degree of public recognition and the necessity for such recognition. With devoted efforts of our attorneys in collection of sufficient evidence and devising of effective arguments, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of China (TRAB) was convinced and granted well-known status to our client's "maxell" trademark when used on goods of recording media, reproduction media, magnetic media, and optical media.
 
And on this basis TRAB further decided that to approve the opposed applications for the registration of a "maxell' trademark on goods of heating apparatus under class 11 and swimsuits under class 25 is likely to result in misleading as to the source of goods among the public, and cause damage of reputation to our client's well-known mark. For this reason, the trademark applications by the respondent were disapproved and our client's trademark right was safeguarded.
 
In another trademark opposition review case, also representing our client Hitachi Maxell as the opponent, CPA attorneys upon investigation and collection of evidence found that the respondent's business license had been revoked for more than nine years, which rendered the application for registration of a trademark unnecessary. Consequently, TRAB determined in favour of our argument supported by the application of a less commonly cited provision that the opposed trademark application violated Article 4 of the Chinese Trademark Law. As a result, the trademark application by the respondent was disapproved and our client's trademark right was again protected.