Trademark Office of State Administration for Industry and Commerce first refused and ruled that the No. 7593290 "汇" trademark is not approved to register in China. However, our client has successfully got the approval of the protection of this international registration for the trademark through a review examination by the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board and is able to get its trademark exclusive rights in China.

Brief information about the case:

Our Chinese client's company filed a registration for the trademark "汇" in China and got rejected by the Chinese Trademark Office rejected for the reason that the main sign of is the Chinese character "汇" is similar to the English wording "3C" of a prior trademark. In addition, the semblable wording "3G", the abbreviation for the 3rd generation telecommunication, directly presents the designated service, is also not allowed in conformity with the Chinese trademark law.

Then we represented our client and filed a review request for the trademark refusal before the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board. In the review, we emphasized that our client's trademark is transformed from the trade names in Chinese and English of its trade name, and it is not similar with the cited trademark in their appearances, pronunciations; and meanings, especially they are in difference languages.

The Trademark Review and Adjudication Board decided that our grounds were tenable and approved the examination of the trademark. Thereby, our Chinese client has cleared the obstacle of trademark registration.

Attorney's comments:

Pursuant to the Chinese trademark law, where a trademark similar to the trademark of another person that has, in respect of the same or similar goods, been registered or, after examination, preliminarily approved, the Trademark Office shall refuse the application and shall not publish the said trademark. In the review, we emphasized that the captioned trademarks are not similar with the cited trademark in their language, appearances, pronunciations; and meanings. It is an original design for our client's trade name, which obviously strengthen the distinctiveness of the mark. Further, we added that our client's trademark has been used for a long time and it will not lead to the confusion of public.

Pursuant to the Chinese trademark law, those having direct reference to the quality, main raw materials, function, use, weight, quantity or other features of the goods in respect of which the trademarks are used, shall not be registered as trademarks. In this case, we put a lot of efforts to prove that our client's trademark with its unique design and meaning, dose not represent 3G telecommunication technology. Therefore it can not be directly linked to the feature and content of its designated service.

To conclude, the above articles are the commonly raised reason for a trademark rejection. Applicants should be aware of the specific provisions, in order to avoid or fight back on such occasions.