Sanyou won the administrative dispute involving review of trademark cancellation representing Meiqi Biotechnology Co., LTD
Sanyou won the administrative dispute involving review of trademark cancellation representing Meiqi Biotechnology Co., LTD
Sanyou client: Meiqi Biotechnology Co., Ltd.
Trial organs: Beijing Intellectual Property Court and Beijing Higher People's Court
Trial result: The Court revoked the first-instance judgment and the sued decision to revoke the review, and ordered the respondent, CNIPA, to make a new decision.
Case facts
Meiqi Biotechnology Co., Ltd. (Meiqi Biotechnology) applied for registration of the trademark "弯弯" No. 512149 on the "Soap" and other goods of Class 3 on April 4, 1989, with the expiry date of exclusive right on February 19, 2030. On December 5, 2017, the third party filed an application to revoke the trademark No. 512149 "弯弯" on the grounds that it had not been used for three consecutive years.
The Trademark Office determined that the use evidence submitted by Meiqi Biotechnology was valid and maintained the registration of the disputed trademark.
The third party refused to accept the cancellation decision and filed an review application. CNIPA determined that the use evidence submitted by Meiqi Biotechnology Company was not sufficient to prove the true and effective commercial use of the disputed trademark on the designated goods within the specified period, and cancelled the registration of the disputed trademark on some of the designated goods.
Meiqi Biotech refused to accept the decision of the revocation review and filed a lawsuit. The court of first instance upheld CNIPA’s decision. Meiqi Biotech filed an appeal with the Beijing Higher People's Court. After the trial, the Court determined that the use evidence submitted by Meiqi Biotechnology Co., Ltd. included notarized sales records on the Alibaba platform, sales invoices, and bank receipts, etc., which could prove that the disputed trademark had been used on the goods for real, legal and effective commercial activities in the review during the specified period. The court therefore revoked the first-instance judgment and the review decision, and the appellee, CNIPA, was ordered to make a new decision.
Typical significance
According to Paragraph 2 of Article 49 of the Trademark Law amended in 2013, if a registered trademark becomes the common name of the goods it is approved to use on, or has not used it for three consecutive years without justifiable reasons, any unit or individual may apply to the Trademark Office to revoke the registered trademark.
At present, due to the surge in the number of trademark applications, when many trademarks are rejected due to the cited trademark, they often resort to the method of revoking the cited trademark on ground of non-use for three consecutive years to overcome the obstacle of rejection, which also leads to a great increase in the number of trademark cancellation cases. It is particularly important for the trademark registrant to actively use the trademark after it is registered and pay attention to keeping the evidence of use.
Use of trademarks includes the use of trademarks on goods, goods packaging or containers, and transaction documents, or the use of trademarks in advertising, exhibitions, and other commercial activities. When a trademark is faced with cancellation request on the grounds that it has not been used for three consecutive years, the trademark registrant can collect evidence from the above aspects. There are generally three issues to pay attention to when submitting use evidence.
1. The use evidence must fall within the specified period.
2. The disputed trademark is used on the approved goods.
3. It belongs to the use of the trademark owner or the use that does not violate the will of the trademark owner, such as the use by the dealer of the trademark.
For trademarks that have actually been used commercially, the trademark owner should strive to maintain the registration of the trademark.
Part of the public information from our website is from the internet. Reposting of such is intended to spread more information and promote network sharing. They do not represent the opinions or any other suggestions of our website and we are not responsible for their authenticity. Part of the works of our website, which we just edit and upload, are from voluntary contributors. Our website only serves as a communicational platform for such works and therefore bears no responsibility for any copyright issues involved. In case you find any works violating your intellectual property rights, please contact us, so that we may change or remove them in time.
All information provided is for reference only. We do not guarantee the accuracy, validity, timeliness and integrity of the information. Our website and our employees are not directly or indirectly responsible to the users or any other people in any way, for any faults, inaccuracy or errors in delivering any information. To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, our website claims that we do not assume liability for any direct, indirect, collateral, consequential, special, punitive or exemplary damages of any user or any other person, incurred by using or failing to use any information or links provided by this website.
- Sanyou wish you and your loved ones peace, prosperity and good health in 2023, the year of Rabbit [2023-01-20 14:07]
- Sanyou won an Administrative Retrial involving trademark infringement & unfair competition disputes and invalidation representing Basic House (Shanghai) CO., LTD [2022-10-25 14:14]
- Trends in China’s examination of divisional applications [2021-12-13 11:07]
- Patent invalidations of "Optical Flat Structure" and "Flat Lens" Sanyou’s Client: Asukanet Co.,Ltd. [2021-12-02 10:33]
- Judicial Interpretations of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law (Draft for Comment) is released [2021-11-26 14:17]
其次,大众点评仍是饿了么的股东之一,只不过多轮融资后,大众点评股份占比已变小,且与美团合并之后,大众点评将放弃在饿了么的董事席位及投票权。需要特别强调的是,大众点评与我们饿了么原有的合作仍继续进行。 最后,竞争是市场经济不变的法则,我们与美团外卖以及其他所有外卖,仍将维持激烈的竞争关系不变。相互砥砺的结果,就是共同为用户和商户提供极致服务。 作为互联网外卖行业的领导者,饿了么有幸依靠自身的实干,依靠为用户、商户提供独特价值,赢得了资本信任,收获了用户口碑和行业地位。
其次,大众点评仍是饿了么的股东之一,只不过多轮融资后,大众点评股份占比已变小,且与美团合并之后,大众点评将放弃在饿了么的董事席位及投票权。需要特别强调的是,大众点评与我们饿了么原有的合作仍继续进行。 最后,竞争是市场经济不变的法则,我们与美团外卖以及其他所有外卖,仍将维持激烈的竞争关系不变。相互砥砺的结果,就是共同为用户和商户提供极致服务。 作为互联网外卖行业的领导者,饿了么有幸依靠自身的实干,依靠为用户、商户提供独特价值,赢得了资本信任,收获了用户口碑和行业地位。