Recently, the State Administration for Industry and Commerce Trademark Review Committee issued a ruling: No. 5066840 "work and map" trademark is not approved for registration. At this point, our agent, Industrial Commercial Bank of China Ltd, as the applicant (original opposition) on the "5066840" work and chart "trademark" filed a review of the case, has achieved a phased victory.

No. 5066840 "and map" trademark by the applicant (the original applicant) Guangzhou Industrial Development Group Co. Ltd. submitted on 19 December 2005 to the national trademark registration application, and enter the preliminary announcement in May 13, 2009. Our party subsequently appealed to the Trademark Office for the trademark. Unfortunately, the trademark office did not accept our objection. Immediately, we are also acting on behalf of our parties to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of objections, review applications.

Review for the application for our fangtao intellectual property rights thought: first, challanged preliminary approval of the trademark services include insurance, capital investment, security, my party has 4141001st registered trademarks (hereinafter referred to a cited trademark) contains almost all financial services, including insurance, capital investment guarantee, at the same time I party number 770116th registered trademarks (hereinafter cited trademark two) is well-known trademarks in the banking sector. Obviously, challanged cited trademarks and trademarks constitute the same or similar services on the similar trademark, enough to cause the relevant public confusion and misidentification, according to the relevant provisions of the "trademark law" in article twenty-eighth, the trademark in question should not be approved for registration.

Trademark No. two and No. 770116th is a well-known trademark recognized by the applicant in July 8, 1993 and registered successfully in October 21, 1994 and recognized as a financial service in 2005. As our party prior to use for many years, also has been registered for many years, has a very high commercial mark's popularity, at the same time, because of the historical status and influence of our party plays an important role in our country and even the global financial sector, the cited trademark has become my client has high visibility, reputation and influence of the intangible assets. The trademark in question "and" once into the market, these advantages by virtue of our party and the commercial signs caused by the no time, no effort will be very market influence and visibility of the commercial signs, which is obviously the trademark in question itself contains the value of the match is not. The most important thing is, so easy to cause consumer confusion or misunderstanding, at the same time will make our party suffered great losses. First of all, this is contrary to the relevant provisions of the trademark law and the spirit of legislation. At the same time, the "should know" or "knowingly" case (cited trademark in 2005 two has been identified as well-known trademarks, the trademark in question is to submit application for registration at the end of 2005) still apply for registration, it is reasonable to postulate that the subjective with obvious malicious and not just when, this would violate "the principle of honesty and credit" general principles of the civil law, such behavior should be banned.

To sum up, the dissenting trademarks should not be approved for registration.

Finally, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board accepted the objection to the review of Fang Tao's intellectual property rights, and ruled that the "work and drawing" was not approved for registration, and the legitimate rights and interests of our party were also effectively maintained.