Applicant of "Jin Men" trademark, Golden Gate Distillery Industrial Co., Ltd., has a high reputation on sorghum wine and other goods. The disputed trademark was filed by the respondent on March 12, 2019, and later approved for registration on July 14, 2021 after the opposition, and approved for use in Class 35 search sponsorship, vending machine rental, sales display stands rental and other services. Golden Gate Distillery Company then entrusted our company to file an invalidation application for the trademark.

In this case, the disputed trademark "Gin Group" constituted similar trademarks used in similar goods and services in terms of text composition with the trademark No. 22942075 Gin and Tu" previously registered by Golden Gate Distillery Industrial Co., Ltd., the trademark No. 6894349 "Golden Gate Distillery and Tu" and the No. 26985897 "Gin Liquor Jiu" trademark (hereinafter referred to as "cited trademarks 1 to 3"), which constituted similar trademarks used in similar goods and services. Furthermore, according to the evidence submitted by the applicant, the applicant's trademark "Golden Gate Sorghum Wine" was recognized as well-known to the relevant public on the "Sorghum Wine" goods before the application date of the disputed trademark. In addition to the disputed trademarks in this case, the respondent applied for the registration of nearly 10 figurative and word trademarks similar to the applicant's trademarks, such as "Golden Gate Original Pulp" and "Golden Gate Aging", on Class 33 goods and Class 35 services. SuGuanghao, the legal representative of the respondent, also applied for the registration of more than 10 graphic and word trademarks similar to the applicant's trademarks such as "Golden Gate Sorghum Wine", "Gin and Tu" on Class 33 goods and Class 35 services. In addition, the respondent also applied for the registration of trademarks that were highly related to other prior brands, such as "88 Aging" and "88 Original Liquid" on Class 33 goods and Class 35 services. The above facts were also confirmed by the (2021) Jingxing Zhong No. 1539 effective administrative judgment rendered by the Beijing Municipal Higher People's Court, and its attempt to make a name for itself is clearly exposed.

Accordingly, after communicating with Golden Gate Distillery Industrial Co., Ltd., collecting and sorting out evidence, our company represented Golden Gate Distillery in filing an application for invalidation of the registered trademark to the State Intellectual Property Office, claiming that the disputed trademark and the cited trademark of Golden Gate Distillery Industrial Co., Ltd. constituted a similar trademark, and at the same time claimed that the disputed trademark violated the provisions of the first paragraph of Article 44 of the Trademark Law.

After hearing, the CNIPA upheld our claim that the disputed trademark constituted "registration by other improper means" as referred to in the first paragraph of Article 44 of the Trademark Law, and ruled that the disputed trademark should be declared invalid.

The first paragraph of Article 44 of the Trademark Law stipulates that if a registered trademark violates the provisions of Articles 4, 10, 11, 12 and 19.4 of this Law, or obtains registration by deception or other improper means, the Trademark Office shall declare the registered trademark invalid; Other units or individuals may request the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to declare the registered trademark invalid.

In trademark invalidation and trademark opposition cases, considering the subjective bad faith of the disputed trademark applicant is the key to the success of the case. In the relevant cases, the agent should conduct in-depth investigation and analysis of the disputed trademark and its applicant, and search for key evidence to prove that the applicant of the disputed trademark has obvious subjective bad faith of plagiarism and imitation, which can prove that the registration of the disputed trademark is not legitimate and reasonable, violates the first paragraph of Article 44 of the Trademark Law, and effectively improves the success rate of the case.