Well, if you follow the above, I feel that you haven't written the point yet. The key to your success in this case lies in whether the applied trademark can be different from the cited trademark in appearance, meaning or other aspects, and whether their existence will lead to confusion and misunderstanding among consumers.

Therefore, in response to the rejection of the Trademark Office, it should be emphasized that:

1. There are some differences in appearance and meaning between the cited trademark and the applied trademark, and their existence will not cause confusion and misunderstanding in consumption;

2. After a long period of extensive use and publicity, the applied trademark has a high reputation among consumers, so that consumers will not associate the applied trademark with the cited trademark;

3. The applicant will eliminate the obstacles caused by the cited trademark to the trademark application by means of transfer or revocation within three years.

What you said before will not help the case, but will make the examiners of the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board feel unprofessional and disgusted, which will have a bad influence on the chances of winning the case.