Recently, Lawyer Zhang Hong and lawyer Li Shuhua of Beijing Janlea Law Firm represented a client from abroad in the “STYLEJCREW” trademark dispute administrative litigation and won in the first-instance trial. On August 27th, the client commissioned our firm to be the plaintiff and sue the dispute adjudication made by the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board. We argued that the “gloves (clothing), ties and belts” associated with trademark in dispute were to be considered as clothes and accessories, and have been used alongside the “clothes, shoes, and hats” associated with the cited trademark, the two depending on each other. They could be retailed by the same company or in adjacent areas, and consumers would often purchase them together. The relevant public, without paying any particular attention, would assume a connection between the two and therefore the two sets of products should be considered as similar products. Beijing No.1 Intermediate People’s Court affirmed our argument and ruled that the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board should issue a new adjudication to repeal the registration of the trademark in dispute on the “gloves (clothing), ties and belts” products. 

The case taught us that the judgment of similar products does not rely on the categorization of product types and similarities in the “Classification Table”, but on the commonsensical and subjective understanding of the public on the products, through their functions, usages, means of sale, means of production and other objective factors. Beijing No.1 Intermediate People’s Court’s novel understanding of the “Classification Table” has deep practical meaning. This is also another successful example of our winning cases of for representing products that conflict the product classification.