INNER MONGOLIA KERCHIN CATTLE INDUSTRY CO., LTD. is an International and professional modern beef industry company. Safe and high-quality beef has obtained multiple international trade recognition and national certification. On December 30, 2005, the trademark "keEr Qin KERCHIN and device" used by the company was recognized as a well-known trademark by the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, and is the first "Chinese Famous Trademark" in the beef industry. The use of this trademark is authorized by INNER MONGOLIA XINSANWEI INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC AND TECHNICAL COOPERATION CORP.,LTD. and is still within the legal authorization period to this day.

The plaintiff in this case, XINSANWEI Company, filed an application for the registration of trademark No. 14310758 "KeEr Qin" with the Trademark Office on April 3, 2014. Subsequently, the Trademark Office and the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board(TRAB) made a decision to reject the trademark application and a reexamination decision to reject the trademark application.

The TRAB believes that the trademark "KeEr Qin" (referred to as the Disputed Mark) applied for registration by XINSANWEI Company, as well as the trademark "KeEr Qin Wang" (referred to as the Cited Mark) applied for registration on January 20, 2014 by Ulanqab Jining PingchengBulaoshen Food Co., Ltd., constitutes similar trademarks on the same or similar goods. The Disputed Mark has constituted the situation referred to in Article 30 of the Trademark Law, and the application for registration of the Disputed Mark is hereby rejected.

XINSANWEI Company is not satisfied with the decision and has entrusted Ma Xingzhou, Lawyer of our firm, to file an administrative lawsuit with the Beijing Intellectual Property Court within the statutory period.

We claim that: the application for registration of the mark "KeEr Qin" No. 14310758 is a reasonable extension of the registration of trademarks "KeEr Qin KERCHIN and device" No. 1522672 and "KeEr Qin" No. 3626524, which were previously approved by the plaintiff on the same or similar goods on September 9, 1999, and have been first used by the plaintiff on designated goods for more than ten years.

The Trademark No. 1522672 was recognized as a "well-known trademark" by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce in December 2005, and has a specific relationship with the plaintiff, much earlier than the application date of the cited trademark on January 20, 2014. Therefore, the plaintiff requests the court to revoke the sued decision and order the defendant to make a new decision of rejection and review.

Lawyer Ma Xingzhou, on behalf of the plaintiff, submitted evidence materials such as the trademark authorization license contract, exhibition contract and invoice, exhibition photos, media reports, advertising materials, honor certificates, audit reports, etc. to the court.

After the trial, the court held that:

1. The Cited Mark was not a trademark that had already been registered or preliminarily approved before the application date of the Disputed Mark, but only a trademark that had been applied for earlier. Therefore, Article 30 of the Trademark Law is not applicable to this case, and Article 31 of the Trademark Law should be applied.

2. The plaintiff registered the two previous trademarks with the same registrant as the Disputed Mark applied for registration later, and the identification is identical. The evidence in the case proves that XINSANWEI Company has long used the two previous trademarks extensively in meat related goods, which has a high reputation among the public and does not have the intention of attaching to the Cited Mark. This is a reasonable extension of registration application based on legitimate commercial needs, and is a continuation of the goodwill formed by the use of the previous trademark, the plaintiff's reasonable application for extension of registration should be protected.

On February 29, 2016, the court made a judgment revoking the rejection review decision made by the TRAB, and theTRAB made a new rejection review decision.

(the prior trademark No.1)

(the prior trademark No.2)

(the Disputed Mark)

(the Cited Mark)