In p>27, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board studied the issue of "* * * deposit agreement" in the case of rejecting the retrial, and defined the conditions of "* * * deposit". That is, whether a trademark can survive or not depends on the similarity and similarity of the goods designated by the trademarks of both parties, as well as their respective popularity:

(1) Although the goods used by the trademarks of both parties are in the same similar group in the Table of Similar Goods or Services, the similarity is low, and there are similarities in the words, graphics or other components of the trademarks, which should be judged as similar trademarks according to the usual examination standards, but the two trademarks can be distinguished by consumers as a whole. On the other hand, if the goods used by two trademarks are the same kind of goods, or similar goods with close correlation, and the trademark words, graphics or other components are similar to each other, which is difficult for consumers to distinguish, * * * is not allowed.

(2) the visibility of the trademarks of both parties. If the cited trademark is well-known and the application for trademark registration and use is easily confused by consumers, the application for trademark shall be rejected. If the trademark applied for has been actually used and has a certain popularity, although there are similarities between the trademark and the cited trademark, but consumers can distinguish it from the cited trademark, they can approve the application for trademark registration.

It can be seen from this that the trademark granted by the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to * * * is an approximate trademark, but it should be a trademark with a low degree of similarity and a certain distinction as a whole. If it is the same trademark on the same goods or services, it is naturally impossible to * * *.