[Case Summary]

In March 2018, our client (referred to as the applicant) registered and applied for the "Easy Kitty Graphic" trademark (referred to as the application trademark) on pet products, which was rejected by the Trademark Office citing the already registered "Pet Yuan Le and Graphic" trademark, stating that the graphic parts of the two were similar. After comparing the applied trademark and the cited trademark as a whole, our agent believes that there are significant differences in the graphic parts of the applied trademark and the cited trademark, and the overall differences are obvious and do not constitute similarity. We suggest that the applicant reject the review and fight for their rights. The applicant immediately conducted a review.

[Result of Trial]

In May 2019, the China National Intellectual Property Administration made a ruling on the reply to the case, and believed that the applied trademark and the citation trademark could be distinguished as a whole, and did not constitute a similar trademark, so the applied trademark was preliminarily approved.

[Case Analysis]

In this case, there is a significant difference in the graphic part between the applied trademark and the cited trademark, not to mention that the corresponding text parts of the two are completely different. The overall recognition and calling of the trademark are clearly different, which is not easy to cause confusion and misidentification among consumers. Here is a warm reminder to applicants that if they encounter a symbol they wish to apply for that is found to be identical or similar in advance, they should not give up blindly. They can apply for rights by combining prominent and recognizable textual elements.