As first reported by 汇知杰, the Reexamination and Invalidation Division of the China Nationwide Mental Property Workplace (PRB) has invalidated a Chinese language design patent for an athletic shoe that makes use of ASICS Company’s trademarked stripes brand. Competitor Qiaodan Sports activities Co. Ltd. (infamous for utilizing Michael Jordan’s Chinese language title as their firm title and in emblems, and many others.) filed design patent software 201430367626.7 on September 29, 2014, which was granted on April 8, 2015. ASICS filed a petition to invalidate the patent on January 20, 2020, which the PRB invalidated the patent on July 7, 2020 based mostly on ASICS’ Chinese language trademark No. 5875801 at school 25 masking athletic sneakers and different items.
The PRB acknowledged that the registered trademark No. 5875801 was obtained earlier than the submitting date of the patent in query and continues to be legitimate. Subsequently, registered trademark No. 5875801 can be utilized to judge whether or not the patent in query complies with Article 23, paragraph three of the Patent Legislation, which reads, “Designs for which a patent proper is granted shall be ones which aren’t in battle with the lawful rights acquired by others previous to the date of software.”
The PRB reasoned, “The patent in query is the design of sports activities sneakers. The merchandise used beneath the registered trademark embody trainers, soccer sneakers, fitness center sneakers and different merchandise. Subsequently, the kinds of merchandise utilized by the 2 are the identical. The 2 sides proven within the design patent in query have patterns composed of traces… Each are patterns fashioned by crossing horizontal and vertical traces. … The primary distinction between the 2 is: the patent concerned has a single horizontal line, whereas the registered trademark has two horizontal traces. The panel believes that as a result of the patent in query and the registered trademark have comparable left-low-right-high, lengthy horizontal traces and double brief vertical traces intersecting the horizontal traces, and the general sample fashioned after the horizontal and vertical traces intersect has an identical visible impact, and the patent concerned solely reduces the variety of horizontal traces of the registered trademark, which is a typical design technique, it isn’t sufficient to have an effect on the similarity of the general visible impact of the 2, and it’s straightforward for the related public to confuse the products of the patent in query and the products of the registered trademark proprietor. “
Accordingly, the PRB held that patent makes use of a sample just like the registered trademark with out authorization, which causes confusion quantity the related public and subsequently damages the rights of the trademark proprietor. Thus, the patent in query is in battle with Article 23, paragraph three of the Patent Legislation and is invalid.
A duplicate of the choice is obtainable right here: CN303153886S_261070.
ASICS was additionally profitable in invalidating 6 different design patents in July 2020 that use the ASICS stripes brand together with Choice No.45363 for Patent No. 201030634206.2; Choice No.45386 for Patent No. 201830688291.7; Choice No.45366 for Patent No. 201530421043.2; Choice No.45364 for Patent No. 201530421223.0; Choice No.45346 for Patent No. 201730509023.X; and Choice No.45344 for Patent No. 201830699779.X.
© 2020 Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A. All Rights Reserved.Nationwide Legislation Evaluate, Quantity X, Quantity 214