Legislative Affairs Office of the State Council, Implementing Regulations for the PRC Trademark Law (Draft Amendment)

If an applicant withdraws his/her/its application for trademark review and adjudication, he/she/it may not again submit an application on identical facts and grounds. Once the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board has rendered a ruling or decision on an application for trademark review and adjudication, no-one may again submit an application on identical facts and grounds. However, this provision shall not apply in the case where registration is approved following a procedure for review of a denial of registration.

Issued: January 10 2014

Main contents: The Draft Amendment defines the term “similar goods” as goods that are identical or essentially identical in terms of function, purpose, production entity, sales channels, target consumers, etc.

The term “similar services” means services that are identical or essentially identical in terms of the objective, contents, method, intended target, etc. of the services.

The Draft Amendment also states that the phrase “trademarks are similar” means similarity in terms of the font style, pronunciation or meaning of the text, or the composition and colour of the device, or the overall structure after combination of the elements, or in terms of the three- dimensional form, colour combination or voice or melody.

If an applicant withdraws his/her/its application for trademark review and adjudication, he/she/it may not again submit an application on identical facts and grounds. Once the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board has rendered a ruling or decision on an application for trademark review and adjudication, no-one may again submit an application on identical facts and grounds. However, this provision shall not apply in the case where registration is approved following a procedure for review of a denial of registration.