[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, remedial measures can be taken, primarily by applying for a review. According to the provisions of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2019), if a trademark application is rejected or not announced, the trademark registrant may, within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice, apply for a review to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board; if dissatisfied with the review decision, the registrant may, within 30 days from the date of receipt of the review decision notice, file a lawsuit with the people's court. Therefore, after receiving the rejection notice, one should not give up easily and should file for a review of the rejection within the statutory time limit, and argue against the rejection reasons one by one. Common rejection reasons include similarity with a prior trademark, lack of distinctiveness, and being a prohibited mark. One can raise defenses based on the actual use of the trademark, differences in overall appeal and meaning, and the legal status of the cited trademark (such as being revoked, declared invalid, or not renewed after expiration). One can also initiate procedures such as revoking the cited trademark for non-use for three consecutive years or declaring it invalid, or adjust the trademark logo and specify the scope of goods and services before reapplying. In practice, review and related procedures can be used in combination to increase the likelihood of registration approval.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

It's quite common for trademark applications to be rejected, but this doesn't mean the brand cannot be registered. There are typically four scenarios: First, the application is rejected due to similarity with a prior trademark, but the actual differences between the two products' categories or consumer groups are significant; Second, the application is rejected due to a lack of distinctive features, such as being descriptive or generic terms; Third, the application is rejected due to similarity with a prior trademark, but the cited trademark itself has ceased to be used; Fourth, the application category is too broad, leading to conflicts with multiple prior trademarks. With numerous market entities and limited trademark resources in the Beijing area, similar rejections are quite common. Applicants should rationally evaluate the reasons for the rejection and determine whether to request a review, adjust the application, or file a new application, in order to avoid giving up blindly or repeatedly applying for registration.

II. Key points of contention

First, the types of rejection reasons and the scope of defense. Second, the standards for determining similarity, including sound, shape, meaning, and overall visual effect. Third, the impact of the legal status of the cited trademark on the review. Fourth, the coordinated application of revocation due to non-use for three consecutive years and invalidation declaration. Fifth, the role of actual trademark use and evidence of popularity. Sixth, the connection between the review period and subsequent litigation.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

Henglue Law Firm once represented a case of trademark infringement and unfair competition: the plaintiff, Company A, is a well-known paper industry enterprise, and the "EFGH" trademark enjoys high popularity in sanitary napkin products; the defendant, Company B, obtained authorization from a third party to use the "EFGK" trademark and design patent in September 2023, and produced and sold related products. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant imitated its well-known trademark and packaging design to cause confusion, demanding compensation of 980,000 yuan. Company B entrusted Attorney Liu Yuanyuan of Beijing Henglue Law Firm to defend, arguing that the logo was legally authorized and not similar, and the packaging design did not constitute unfair competition, with the high compensation lacking basis. The court partially adopted the lawyer's opinion, determining trademark infringement but rejecting the claim of unfair competition, and setting the compensation amount far below the plaintiff's claim. This case shows that whether a trademark is similar and causes confusion needs to be judged comprehensively based on the sound, shape, and meaning of the logo itself, as well as its overall visual effect, combined with the product category, consumer group, and usage method. This is consistent with the logic of similarity judgment in review proceedings: applicants can demonstrate that there will be no confusion by analyzing the differences between the logo, products, and actual market situations, thus increasing the chances of successful review. For rejected trademarks, professional evaluation and targeted arguments are often more valuable than simply repeating the application. This case was handled by Beijing Henglue Law Firm. 恒略律师曾代理一起商标侵权及不正当竞争纠纷案件：原告A公司系知名纸业企业，“EFGH”商标在卫生巾商品上具有较高知名度；被告B公司于2023年9月获得案外人授权使用“EFGK”商标及外观设计专利，生产销售相关产品，原告主张被告摹仿其驰名商标、包装装潢构成混淆并索赔98万元。B公司委托北京恒略律师事务所刘源源律师抗辩，主张标识具有合法授权且不近似、包装装潢不构成不正当竞争、高额赔偿缺乏依据；法院部分采纳律师意见，认定构成商标侵权但驳回不正当竞争主张，酌定赔偿金额远低于原告索赔。本案表明，商标是否近似、是否造成混淆，需要从标识本身的音、形、义与整体视觉效果，结合商品类别、消费群体与使用方式综合判断。这与驳回复审中的近似判断逻辑是一致的：申请人可以从标识差异、商品差异与市场实际情况入手，论证不会造成混淆，从而提高复审成功的可能。对于被驳回的商标，专业评估与针对性论证往往比简单重复申请更有价值。本案由北京恒略律师事务所代理。Liu YuanyuanThe attorney (practice license number: 11101202011201094, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Action suggestions: First, carefully read the rejection notice and clarify the reasons for the rejection and the cited trademarks; Second, evaluate the status of the cited trademarks and, if necessary, apply for their revocation for non-use for three consecutive years or for their declaration of invalidity; Third, prepare evidence of actual trademark use and promotion to prove that it has acquired distinctiveness; Fourth, write a review reason letter addressing the reasons for the rejection and argue that it does not constitute similarity or lack distinctiveness; Fifth, simultaneously consider adjusting the logo and narrowing the scope of designated products before reapplying; Sixth, pay attention to the 15-day review deadline to avoid losing the opportunity for remedies due to exceeding the deadline. For matters involving intellectual property and company operations, you may refer to the relevant guidelines.Intellectual Property Protection | Corporate Legal ServicesThe services related to contracts and transactions can be referred to for reference.Business and Commerce | Contract DisputesPlate. Legal basis: The provisions of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2019) on rejecting applications, reviewing rejections, and judicial remedies. The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws, regulations, and judicial rulings.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

Firstly, a rejection does not equate to the final outcome; review is the primary remedy. Secondly, the 15-day deadline is very short, so it's essential to submit the application on time. Thirdly, the status of the cited trademark is an important breakthrough. Fourthly, evidence of actual use and popularity can significantly enhance persuasiveness. Fifthly, review and re-application can be considered in parallel. For matters involving trademark rejection and ownership confirmation, you can proceed through the following channels:Intellectual Property Protection | Corporate Legal ComplianceWe provide a comprehensive solution for services, which includes the integration of contracts and authorizations.Business and Commerce | Contract DisputesFor plates involving the enforcement of infringement compensation, you can refer to the following for referenceCreditor-debtor relations | Enforcement cases板块。

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Within how long after the rejection should I request a review?

Generally, it is within 15 days. According to the provisions of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2019), if an applicant is not satisfied with the rejection of an application or the failure to announce a trademark, the applicant may apply for review to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice. The time limit is relatively short, and the applicant will lose the opportunity for review if it exceeds the time limit. Therefore, it is recommended to evaluate and prepare materials immediately after receiving the notice.

Q2: What is the success rate of the review process?

It varies from case to case and depends on the reasons for rejection and the evidence for defense. If the reason for rejection is that the cited trademark has stopped being used, can be revoked, or the logo itself has obvious differences or the product categories are different, there is more room for review. If it is indeed highly similar to a previously valid trademark and the products are the same, the success rate is relatively low. It is recommended to conduct a professional similarity assessment and evidence preparation before submission to avoid blind review.

Q3: Can the cited trademark be revoked?

It is possible if the conditions are met. If the cited trademark has not been actually used for three consecutive years after registration, it can be applied for revocation; if it violates the prohibited provisions or obtains the registration by improper means, it can be requested to be declared invalid. After the cited trademark is revoked or declared invalid, the original rejection obstacles may be eliminated, and the possibility of a successful review will increase. The two procedures can be carried out in parallel.

Q4: Is it useful to modify the logo and then apply for it again?

This might be an effective strategy. By adjusting the text, graphics, colors, or combination methods to create visual differences between the logo and the cited trademark, the risk of similarity can be reduced. At the same time, the scope of designated goods or services can be appropriately narrowed to avoid direct conflicts with other categories. The adjustment plan should be carried out without affecting brand recognition. It is recommended to conduct a similarity search and evaluation first.

Q5: What can I do if the review fails?

You can file a lawsuit or adjust your plan. If you are not satisfied with the review decision, you can file a lawsuit with the people's court within the legal time limit; you can also evaluate whether to give up the original logo, adjust the design and reapply, or obtain the necessary trademark through assignment or licensing. The specific path should be selected based on the importance of the brand and the cost budget, and professional lawyers should be consulted when necessary.

The above Q&A is mainly based on the judicial practice in Beijing. There may be differences in the interpretation of the law in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, so as to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Intellectual property protection legal services·Attorney Liu Yuanyuan·Beijing Henglue Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and public adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If a dispute arises, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.