Beijing No.1 Intermediate People's Court recently entered the first-instance decision in favor of DuPont Company against the registration of trademark “新胜龙杜邦”(bearing the same Chinese translation for DuPont as part of the whole trademark). The court held that the trademark “新胜龙杜邦” filed by the Shanghai Shenglong Decorative Material Company Ltd.(hereinafter as Shanghai Shenglong) is similar with DuPont's registered trademark “杜邦”(“DuPont” in Chinese version) and rejected the decision by the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB) Under the State Administration for Industry and Commerce.
In September 2003, Shanghai Shenglong applied the registration of “新胜龙杜邦 and device” as a trademark in Class 19, covering the products of artificial marble. The mark was approved in December 2005. In 2007, DuPont challenged the trademark and sought for cancellation of registration of the alleged trademark. However, the TRAB denied DuPont's claim, holding that there's great disparity between the two marks with regard to products raw materials, functions and consumers. .And the evidence submitted by DuPont was not sufficient to prove that "DuPont" has become a well-known trademark in China before the registration of “新胜龙杜邦 and device”. So, TRAB made a ruling in favor of the defendant.
Then the DuPont appealed the case before the court. After examination, the court held that the products covered by both marks were almost the same in terms of function and sale channel. Further, the mark “杜邦” is contained as part of the alleged mark. The court found that the two trademarks are similar marks used on similar goods and it is mostly likely to confuse the public. Therefore, the court made a first-instance judgment in favor of DuPont and rejected the registration of “新胜龙杜邦”.
