【Basic Facts】 
Invalid applicant: Shenzhen Nanxiewei Technology Co., Ltd. (represented by us) 
Defendant: Jingsjing Instrument Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. 


The main reasons of the applicant: 
The disputed trademark is considered to be a similar trademark to the applicant's previously registered trademark No. 7812864, "NSIWAY NS", as referred to in Article 30 of the Trademark Law. The registration of the disputed trademark demonstrates obvious subjective malice and violates Article 44, Paragraph 1 of the Trademark Law. The registration of the disputed trademark violates the principle of good faith and may cause adverse social impacts, and it also violates Article 7 and Article 10, Paragraph 1 (8), of the Trademark Law.

【Typical Significance】 
The disputed trademark in this case is the cited trademark in the client's appeal for reconsideration. During the appeal process, we discovered that the applied-for trademark was the upper part of the client's prior trademark, but it cited the disputed trademark which was rejected. At that time, it was considered that the reconsideration would be made by the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board. If the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board determined that the client's applied-for trademark was not similar to the disputed trademark, we would recognize that the disputed trademark was not similar to the client's prior combined trademark, and thus the invalidation would fail and the reconsideration would succeed; but if the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board determined that the applied-for trademark was similar to the disputed trademark, and accordingly the disputed trademark and the client's prior combined trademark were also similar, then the invalidation would succeed and the reconsideration would fail. 
The final administrative tribunal held that: The disputed trademark was similar to the client's prior trademark in terms of the 0913 (II) category. The invalidation part was successful. The invalidation of the disputed trademark 0913 "chip (integrated circuit)" directly made the success of the applied trademark possible. 0913 (II) is the client's most important product category. 


【Case Handling Insights】 
Since the owner of the disputed trademark is an applicant from the same company, although a cancellation application can be filed, considering the uncontrollability of the cancellation process and the fact that it is also a ruling by the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board, the re-examination and invalidation cases will always have one case that needs to be approved. Invalidation is the optimal solution to eliminate obstacles. 
During the case handling process, based on the principle of consistency in review, when a case is rejected, there is usually an opportunity to raise objections and uncover invalid cases, forcing the Trademark Office and the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to maintain consistency at least within their respective jurisdictions, thereby securing the safest solution for the client.