We once reported the administrative refusal on Mcdonald’s opposition on Wonderful’s trademark (the W trademark) which is similar to Mcdonald’s “M” trademark (you may check the details in How Could McDonald’s Beat Free Rider of Trademark in China?). After that, Mcdonald’s initiated the administrative lawsuit on the refusal.
According to Beijing Morning Post’s report on 10th December, Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court judged on the first instance of the administrative lawsuit, refusing the claims of Mcdonald’s.
It’s determined by the court in the first instance that the W trademark is used in the non trading related professional consultancy and other services which are different from M trademark’s approved field of restaurant in the aspect of service purpose, content, method, object, and for this reason, the court maintained the administrative decision.
By China administrative laws, any party of the lawsuit dissatisfying on the first instance’ judgment may appeal to a higher court, therefore, Bridge IP Law Commentary believes McDonald’s will start the second instance of the lawsuit and we will pay close attention on the case.
For more news on the trademark issues in China, you may click non-litigation matters & litigation matters.
Editor: Mr.Huang Mengren &
Attorney-at-law of DeBund Law Offices
Co-editor: Mr. You Yunting
Founder & Editor-in-Chief of Bridge IP Law Commentary
Partner & Attorney-at-law of Shanghai DeBund Law Offices
Email: Bridge@chinaiplawyer.com, Tel: 8621-5213-4900,
You can also find us on Facebook, Twitter and Linkedin.
Bridge IP Law Commentary is a website focus on the introduction of commercial laws in China, especially the intellectual property laws. All the posts here are our original works. And all news or cases referred here are from public reports, and our comments or analysis are of due diligence, neutrality and impartiality, representing our own opinions only and are our original works. You may contact us shall you have any opinions or suggestions.
Short Link: