Trademark Opposition Case No. 18896732, Xiangxi Ancient Prescription (one of the 20 typical cases announced by the judges)

　　 Trademark Application:

　　 I. Basic Case Facts

　　Trademark No. 18896732, Xiangxi Gufang (hereinafter referred to as the "Applicant Trademark"), was filed for registration by Tian Moumou (hereinafter referred to as the "Applicant") on January 15, 2016, for use on goods in Class 5, such as "medicinal tea". Upon review, it was found that "Xiangxi" in the Applicant Trademark is the name of a county-level administrative division in China and may not be used as a trademark, violating Article 10, Paragraph 2 of the Trademark Law. Therefore, the application for registration of the Applicant Trademark was rejected. The Applicant, dissatisfied with the rejection decision, filed a request for review in accordance with the law.

　　Upon review, it was considered that although the Applicant Trademark contains the words "Xiangxi", its combination with "Gu Fang" has formed a meaning stronger than that of the place name, and does not constitute the circumstances stipulated in Article 10, Paragraph 2 of the Trademark Law. However, the Applicant Trademark is likely to mislead consumers regarding the raw materials and formula of the goods, violating Article 10, Paragraph 1, Item (7) of the Trademark Law. Therefore, a review opinion was issued to the Applicant. The Applicant submitted written comments within the prescribed time limit, stating that "Xiangxi Gufang" is only a name and a process, and will not cause consumers to misinterpret the raw materials, and requested that the Applicant Trademark be preliminarily approved.

　　 II. Decision Result

　　Although the Applicant Trademark contains the words "Xiangxi", its combination with "Gu Fang" has formed a meaning stronger than that of the place name, and does not constitute the circumstances stipulated in Article 10, Paragraph 2 of the Trademark Law. However, the Applicant Trademark as a whole, designated for use on goods such as "medicinal tea", is likely to mislead consumers regarding the raw materials, formula, and other characteristics of the goods, constituting the circumstances referred to in Article 10, Paragraph 1, Item (7) of the Trademark Law. Therefore, the application for registration of the Applicant Trademark on all the reviewed goods is rejected.

　　 III. Typical Significance

　　Article 10, Paragraph 1, Item (7) of the Trademark Law stipulates that trademarks that are deceptive or are likely to mislead the public regarding the quality, characteristics, or place of origin of goods shall not be used. This provision is intended to promote market integrity, regulate the use of commercial marks, avoid misleading advertising, and protect consumer rights. The essential characteristic of a trademark is to distinguish the source of goods. A mark that describes the characteristics of goods does not inherently possess the distinctive characteristics required of a trademark, but it can acquire distinctiveness through use. However, if a mark, in addition to lacking distinctiveness, is also deceptive and likely to mislead the public, it may have an adverse impact on public interest and consumer safety. The use of such marks should be strictly prohibited. In this case, "Gu Fang" generally refers to methods or techniques passed down from ancient times, implying a long history. In medicinal goods, using "Gu Fang" as a mark is likely to lead consumers to believe that the marked goods are prepared according to an ancient formula and have specific efficacy. The Applicant Trademark is a combination of the geographical name "Xiangxi" and "Gu Fang", designated for use on medicinal tea, medicinal ointments, etc., and is likely to mislead consumers regarding the raw materials, formula, and other characteristics of the goods. Therefore, in accordance with Article 10, Paragraph 1, Item (7) of the Trademark Law, the application for the Applicant Trademark is rejected.