Trademark Information

Disputed trademark: “泰山 & Device”(the pronunciation is “Taishan”, Hereafter refers to as “Taishan & Device”).
Designated Goods/services: Class 29: south intestine; pressed salted duck; roast chicken.

Case Introduction

The third party, Jinan Laiwu Yuxiangzhai Food Co.,Ltd., obtained the exclusive right to use the trademark No.301632“Taishan & Device”through transfer on December 27, 2018, and the trademark was maintained through the procedures of revocation and revocation review. The plaintiff, PENG Junfeng, filed a lawsuit to the Beijing Intellectual Property Court against the decision of Trademark Revocation Review Decision, which was issued by the CNIPA. The main purpose of the case is to examine and review whether the trademark has been used truly and openly in the approved goods of commercial use during the designated period from May 24, 2016 to May 23, 2019. Attorneys for the plaintiff also reviewed the evidence materials provided by the third party in the administrative proceedings. After inquiry, the only sales invoice provided by the third party showed inconsistent position of reviewed trademark logo in the copy of the invoice provided during the procedures of revocation and the revocation review. However, the "National VAT Invoice Inspection Platform of the State Administration of Taxation" showed that the real invoice did not reflect the reviewed trademark mark. In response to this situation, the plaintiff's agent notarized and preserved the evidence and submitted it to the court. The court also adjourned the court in the middle of the trial and logged on the "National VAT Invoice Inspection Platform of the State Administration of Taxation" to check the invoice problem. After hearing, the court affirmed:......The copy of the sales invoice was checked by the court in the "National VAT Invoice Inspection Platform of the State Administration of Taxation". It was found that the invoice with the date of March 21, 2019 and the amount of 18786.41 yuan did not show the word "Taishan" in the column of specifications and models, which was obviously inconsistent with the copy of the invoice submitted by the third party, and the third party did not give a reasonable explanation, Therefore, the evidence in the case can't prove that the disputed trademark was really, effectively and legally used in the goods of "south intestine; pressed salted duck; roast chicken" within the specified period, and the defendant's decision was revoked and ordered to make a new decision.

Gaowo’s Comments

This case is a trademark revocation review case, which mainly examines whether the trademark has been used in the sense of trademark law during the specified period and in the approved use of goods / services, which requires enterprises or individuals to provide effective evidence of use. Whether it is administrative procedure or administrative litigation procedure, the parties should provide evidence in good faith and put an end to falsifying evidence, otherwise they will be punished and the reputation of the enterprise will be affected.

Epilogue

Gaowo is a professional legal service organization engaged in intellectual property agency business. If you encounter problems in intellectual property, you can choose us to carry out intellectual property layout and planning for you. We will do our best to protect your intellectual property!