Applicant: Xiamen Frontier Technology Development Co., Ltd.

	申请商标1	申请商标2	引证商标1	引证商标2
申请号	53077784	53064908	27627699	35241236
商标图样
申请日期	2021-01-18	2021-01-18	2017-11-22	2018-12-11
注册日期			2018-11-14	2019-12-21
申请人	厦门市前沿科技开发有限公司	厦门市前沿科技开发有限公司	山东力晚志量国际贸易有限公司	西安益合泰商贸有限公司
类别	35		35	35
冲突群组/项目
3501	广告；广告宣传；户外广告；广告代理；商业橱窗布置；计算机网络上的在线广告；为零售目的在通信媒体上展示商品；广告空间出租	为零售目的在通信媒体上展示商品,广告空间出租,广告代理,广告,广告宣传,商业橱窗布置,计算机网络上的在线广告,户外广告	广告宣传	/
3503	市场营销	市场营销	进出口代理；市场营销	/
3508	(2)寻找赞助	(2)寻找赞助	/	(2)寻找赞助；(3)销售展示架出租
非冲突群组/项目
3502	/		通过网站提供商业信息；饭店商业管理；特许经营的商业管理	/
3504	/		人事管理咨询	/
3506	/		文秘	/
3507	/		会计	/
3509	/		(1)药品零售或批发服务	/

Reconsideration Decision: 
No. 53077784: After review, it was determined that the applied-for trademark can be distinguished from the trademark "Yili Circle and Graphic" (registered as No. 35241236) and the graphic trademark (registered as No. 27627699) cited in the rejection decision. They do not constitute similar trademarks on similar services. 
According to Article 28 of the "Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China", the administrative authority hereby makes the following decision: 
The application for the registration of the trademark in the review service has been preliminarily approved. 

2. No. 53064908: After review, it was determined that the graphic parts of the applied-for trademark and the reference trademarks No. 1 and No. 2 are similar in terms of visual effect and other aspects. The services for which the applied-for trademark is designated, such as "outdoor advertising", and the services for which the reference trademarks No. 1 and No. 2 are approved, such as "advertising promotion", belong to similar services. If these trademarks are used simultaneously on similar services, consumers, under a state of separation and with average attention, are likely to have confusion and mistake regarding the source of the services. This constitutes a similar trademark used on similar services. The evidence submitted by the applicant is insufficient to deny the possibility of confusion. 
In accordance with Articles 30 and 34 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China, the administrative authority hereby makes the following decisions: 
The application for the registration of the trademark in the review service has been rejected. 

【Typical Significance】 
When applying for both combined trademarks and pure graphic trademarks, if the cited trademarks are exactly the same, and a re-examination application is filed simultaneously, the results of the re-examination will be completely opposite. The re-examination of the pure graphic trademark fails, while the re-examination of the combined trademark is successful. 
From the judgment results of the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board, it can be roughly concluded that this year's review cases were slightly more lenient in terms of the same or similar standards. When the graphic parts are not exactly the same, the significant differences in the text part can enhance the overall recognizability of the trademark, and more consideration will be given to how consumers in the market call the trademark.

【Case Handling Insights】 

Due to the strong subjectivity of graphic trademarks, their accuracy in query is not as good as that of textual trademarks. If the client strongly desires a graphic but the query results are uncertain, it is recommended to apply for a combined trademark, incorporating a prominent textual part. Even if the application is rejected at the initial stage, the success rate of the re-examination is relatively high.