Successfully overcame the rejection of the "lack of distinctiveness" for the trademark, achieving the confirmation of the core brand identity.

2025-11-19

I. Case Introduction
A well-known fintech company's key trademark application in the core service category was rejected by the Trademark Office on the grounds that it "merely directly indicates the content and characteristics of the service" and lacked inherent distinctiveness. Facing the huge commercial risk that the core brand might fall into a protection vacuum, the ZYIP team formulated a comprehensive plan of "evidence breakthrough + legal defense + strategy adjustment". Through systematic use of evidence and legal arguments, they successfully persuaded the review authority and ultimately obtained the trademark registration, firmly securing the client's core brand assets.
Please provide the text that needs to be translated accurately and fluently into

II. Case Details
1. Customer Type/Industry
A well-known fintech company, whose business covers related services such as finance and insurance.

2. Customer Pain Points/Problem Description
(1) Obstruction in core brand registration: The trademark application for the core service was rejected outright due to a lack of distinctiveness.
(2) Huge business risks: If the trademark cannot be authorized, it will face multiple risks such as a vacuum in brand protection, loss of marketing investment, and damage to the enterprise's valuation.
(3) High legal argument threshold: It is necessary to provide sufficient evidence to prove that the trademark has acquired "secondary meaning" through use, surpassing its descriptive nature. The burden of proof is heavy and the argumentation is difficult.

3. Solutions and Process
(1) Evidence Breakthrough: Systematically Establishing the "Obtaining Significance Through Use" Argument Framework
Market Usage Evidence: Systematically collating sales contracts, invoices, advertising records, authoritative media reports, etc. over the past 5 years to prove the continuous and extensive use of the trademark.
Consumer Perception Evidence: Submitting a market survey report covering over 1,000 samples, showing that more than 80% of consumers can directly and uniquely associate the trademark with the client brand.
Industry Authority Endorsement: Obtaining and submitting a "Leading Market Brand" certificate issued by an authoritative industry association to substantiate that the trademark already has the function of distinguishing the source of services within the industry.
(2) Legal Defense: Precisely Challenging the Review Standards and Conclusions
Arguing for "Secondary Meaning": The core claim is that although the trademark is descriptive, through long-term and extensive use and promotion, it has established a stable source identification function among the relevant public and has acquired acquired distinctiveness.
Citing precedents: Listing multiple registered trademark cases of similar nature previously approved by the Trademark Office/Courts to prove that the review standards have flexibility and room for consistent application.
(3) Strategy Adjustment: Implementing Defensive Layout and Multiple Rights Protection
Simultaneously submitted applications for variations of the trademark and combined trademarks to reduce the registration risks caused by its descriptive nature.
Registered the unique design of the trademark for copyright protection, forming a composite rights protection network with trademark rights as the mainstay and copyright as the supplement.

4. Results/Data
(1) Successful Approval: The Trademark Office accepted all the claims of ZYIP and determined that the applied trademark had acquired distinctiveness through use and was easily recognizable, and thus granted preliminary approval.
(2) Risk Mitigation: This case helped the client preserve its core brand assets and avoided potential huge market losses and strategic disadvantages.
(3) Experience Accumulation: The "evidence package construction + legal contention defense" model formed in this case provides a highly valuable reference model for dealing with similar cases lacking distinctiveness and resulting in rejections.

III. Case Significance
This case is a prime example of successfully overcoming trademark registration obstacles by applying the legal principle of "achieving significance through utilization". It fully demonstrates that in the real business environment where brand strategy precedes registration planning, systematic and rigorous collection of evidence of use and legal argumentation can win legal recognition for seemingly hopeless "lacking-significance" trademarks. Through this case, ZYIP not only safeguarded the valuable brand achievements for the enterprise but also demonstrated the indispensable bridging value of professional agencies in complex intellectual property confirmation cases, providing key support for the brand protection of innovation-driven enterprises.

Return

Previous：ZYIP has established an all-round trademark and brand management system for the top 500 jewelry enterprises, strengthening the defense line for brand protection. Next：Successfully prevented the registration of maliciously similar trademarks, safeguarding the client's core brand