[Case Summary]
Zhejiang Nandu Power Co., Ltd. has experienced 25 years of professional development in the battery field, formed a strong technical and market deposit, has developed into a leader in the battery industry at home and abroad, its "Narada" trademark has been identified as a well-known trademark, "Narada" trademark has been named Zhejiang export famous brand by Zhejiang Provincial Department of Commerce. It has become a world-renowned brand and enjoys high visibility and influence in domestic and foreign industries.
When the team assisted the customer in trademark opposition monitoring, it was found that a company in Heze City applied for the registration of the trademark "NANADU" in Class 9 on March 19, 2022, and its commodities are "mobile power supply (rechargeable battery), battery storage, and batteries for vehicles". After examination and comparison, we believe that the "NANADU" trademark and "Narada" trademark have a higher degree of similarity, the first two letters "NA" are exactly the same, only the third and sixth letters are different, and the remaining four letters are arranged in the same order, which is not easy to distinguish. And does not form a clear difference of meaning, it is easy to make the relevant public to confuse or misidentify the source of goods. In order to protect its prior rights from infringement, Zhejiang Nandu Company commissioned the team to file an objection application for the trademark.
Comparison of trademark pattern:
The opposed mark
|
Cited mark
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Result of Trial]
The case has now been concluded, and the Trademark Office ruled that the disputed trademark "NANADU" should not be registered.
After examination, the Trademark Office held that the functional purposes and consumption objects of the goods designated to be used by the opposed trademark "NANADU" and the trademark "Narada" cited by the opponent are the same or similar, and belong to similar goods; The difference between the letter structure and overall appearance of the trademarks of both parties is not obvious, which has formed a similar trademark. Therefore, the trademarks of both parties have formed a similar trademark used on similar goods. The registration and use of the disputed trademarks may cause confusion and misrecognition by relevant consumers, so the "NANADU" trademark shall not be registered.
[Case Analysis]
In this case, the registration of the opposed trademark is the imitation and plagiarism of the "Narada" and "Narada Narada" trademarks. Once the opposed trademark is approved for registration and use, it will undoubtedly encourage others to imitate this behavior, thereby damaging the legitimate rights and interests of the prior trademark owner, causing unfair competition and market chaos. Therefore, this kind of malicious registration behavior should be stopped in time.
In practice, enterprises or individuals can also entrust us to regularly monitor key trademarks, and if it is found that a relatively similar trademark application registration has entered the announcement period, it can start the trademark objection application procedure in time to safeguard its own relevant rights and interests.
Attached decision not to register:
|
