From a practical point of view, it is a common and effective strategy and method to search before actual use, split multiple combined trademarks and apply for registration in defensive trade mark. In formulating the trademark registration strategy, I would like to provide two aspects that are rarely discussed and paid little attention to, but are actually very important:

Being a truly responsible trademark consultant and lawyer in advance will not blindly tell the customer whether the trademark should be applied for or not, but will always tell him first: I need to determine the category, goods or services according to your business, and do a search to see if it has been registered, or the existence of a previous similar trademark may threaten rejection. ? Trademark retrieval is of great significance, which can not only avoid unnecessary waste, but also prepare for possible rejection and objection in advance, and collect, sort out and file evidence in advance. However, trademark retrieval is not only about entering categories and keywords in the official website of the Trademark Office, but also jumping out of the results and looking at them one by one.

2. There are many reasons for being rejected in advance or preparing for objections, unless it is because the logo is prohibited by the trademark law (such as the national flag and national emblem, which is harmful to public order and good customs), which is nothing more than lack of distinctiveness and similar to the previous trademark. These two are the main reasons. In such cases of rejection of re-examination, the question of approximate judgment is not discussed here. I would like to offer a suggestion, that is, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (including the Beijing Intellectual Property Court and the Beijing Higher People's Court) will not only judge whether the logo itself is similar or not, but also consider the popularity of the rejected trademark comprehensively. If you can prove that the trademark has been in use since the date of application, and it has become a minor celebrity (or a certain popularity) by the date of rejection, it will help you convince the referee that your trademark has made a significant difference from the previous trademark, in the case of ambiguity (that is, you are right to say that it is approximate, and you are right to say that it is not approximate, which depends entirely on the subjective opinion of the referee), and it would have been possible to continue to reject it without proof.