Zang Baoqing, Regulations Division of the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce
The revision of the trademark review content in the Trademark Law Implementation Regulations (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations) closely focuses on the requirements of the Trademark Law in terms of facilitating parties' registration applications and maintaining the market order of fair competition. The requirements of the law to simplify and optimize authorization and confirmation procedures, and increase efforts to combat malicious registrations will be further implemented to protect the legitimate rights and interests of parties involved in trademark review cases, standardize specific administrative actions for trademark authorization and confirmation, and maintain a fair and efficient order for trademark authorization and confirmation. play an important role.
1. Definition of "trademark review"
Article 2 of the Trademark Law stipulates that the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board handles trademark disputes, and has made specific provisions in multiple legal articles in Chapters 3, 5 and 6. Article 51 of the Regulations defines "trademark review" for the first time, clearly stipulates the scope of the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board's handling of "trademark disputes", enumerates specific provisions of the trademark law, and more clearly defines the law for trademark review and confirmation. in accordance with.
Second, the provisions of the Trademark Law regarding the adjustment of opposition procedures have been refined
In view of the adjustment of the trademark law to the opposition procedure, the Regulations have repositioned the nature of the review procedure for denial of registration. While clarifying the nature of "review", it also takes into account the particularity of the trademark confirmation procedure and gives full play to the role of the review procedure in stopping bad faith. Functional role in squatting. Article 53 of the Regulations stipulates the content and procedures for the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to review cases of denial of registration, and clarifies that the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board shall listen to the opinions of the original opponent while hearing the Trademark Office's decision to deny registration.
The Trademark Law, in accordance with the requirements of restructuring the opposition procedure, deletes Article 42 of the old law, which states that "a trademark that has been opposed and adjudicated before registration is approved shall not be and then apply for a ruling based on the same facts and reasons.” In order to make the opposition's relief channels clearer, Article 62 of the Regulations clearly stipulates that after the registration is approved through the review process of disapproval of registration, the opponent may file a request to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to declare the registered trademark invalid, clarifying the relief procedures for the opponent. Better balance between efficiency and fairness.
3. It is more conducive to protecting the legal rights of the parties involved in review and review cases
The Trademark Law regulates various cases heard by the Trademark Review and Review Board. The trial time limit is clearly stipulated, which is conducive to improving the efficiency of case trial and protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the parties. According to the statutory trial procedures, the trial time limit consists of the working time of the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board and the time required for the parties to exercise their procedural rights. In order to avoid the need to improve trial efficiency In order to squeeze the time for the parties to exercise their rights and fully protect the rights of the parties, Article 11 of the Regulations clearly stipulates that the period during which the documents are announced and served, the parties need to supplement evidence or correct documents, and the period when the parties need to re-defend due to the change of parties are not included in the calculation. Limitation of trial; In order to avoid damage to the rights of the parties due to uncertainty of prior rights, Article 35, paragraph 4, and Article 45, paragraph 3 of the new law stipulate the procedure for suspending case trials. The regulations further clarify that “during the trial, "The period of waiting for the outcome of the trial of the prior rights case at the request of the case applicant" will not be counted in the trial limit. These regulations can not only effectively supervise the efficient performance of the functions of the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board, but also fully protect the substantive and procedural rights of the parties involved in the review case.
Fourth, further standardizing the specific administrative actions for trademark authorization and confirmation
The Trademark Review and Adjudication Board hears trademark review cases under the authorization of the Trademark Law, which falls within the scope of specific administrative actions and should follow the basic principles of administration according to law. The trial scope of various types of review cases is not only the effective basis for the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to hear various cases, but also is strictly defined The scope of the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board's exercise of powers has been stipulated in Articles 52, 53, 54, 55, and 56 of the Regulations in response to disputes existing in practice regarding the scope of review cases. The provisions on the scope of review cases in the original trademark review rules have been revised and increased, and a new provision on the scope of review cases for invalidation has been added. This modification can effectively eliminate the vague understanding and disagreement on the scope of review cases. , which is conducive to unifying the understanding between the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board and the judicial authorities, and also further regulates the scope of the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board’s exercise of powers.
Although the regulations before the amendment The time limit for the parties to submit evidence is stipulated, but it does not clearly stipulate how the evidence submitted by the party after the deadline should be handled, which brings inconvenience to the parties' submission of evidence and the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board's acceptance of relevant evidence in case review practice. Therefore, Article 59 of the Regulations The rules for the admission of overdue evidence are clarified, stipulating that evidence generated after the expiration of the time limit or the parties have other legitimate reasons for failing to submit it before the expiration of the time limit can be admissible after cross-examination.
5. Highlight the actual needs and operability of the workSex
The regulations also provide for some ambiguities that exist in practice. For example, Article 12 clearly stipulates the general period. The starting date and specific calculation method, and special provisions are made for the calculation of the protection period of the exclusive right to use a trademark; Article 49 clarifies that a request for invalidation of an internationally registered trademark shall be made when the rejection period expires or the administrative decision becomes effective; Sixth Article 11 stipulates that the parties’ withdrawal of review application shall be reviewed and confirmed by the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board. These provisions are helpful for parties to clarify the rights granted by the law and facilitate them to use legal procedures to safeguard their legal rights.
Source: Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce
