Case Summary：

The disputed trademark application, application No. 3395922 " " was applied for registration on goods "Plum wine, Liqueur, Rice alcohol, Liqueurs, Cider, Sparkling wine, Whisky, Wujiapi wine, Wine, Sake, Baijiu" and the like in Class 33 on December 6, 2002 by BOHAE BREWERY CO., LTD.

The Visa Association raised an opposition against the disputed trademark based on its earlier registered trademark " " on goods "Printed bank card, Traveler's cheque" and the like in Class 16 and trademark " " on services "Credit card and debit card service, Traveler's cheque service" and the like in Class 36. The then Trademark Office ruled that the disputed trademark was approved for registration. The Visa Association requested reexamination in disagreement with the ruling. The then Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB), after examination, held that the main business of the Visa Association was far different from the designated goods such as Baijiu of the disputed trademark, and that the evidence was insufficient to prove that the registration and use of the disputed trademark would easily cause confusion and misunderstanding of the source of goods by relevant consumers, thus damaging interests of the Visa Association. For the above reasons, it ruled that the disputed trademark was approved for registration.

The Visa Association was dissatisfied with the ruling and filed an administrative litigation with the Beijing First Intermediate People's Court. The Court held that the evidence submitted cannot prove that the two cited trademarks of the Visa Association were well known to the public in mainland China and qualified as well-known trademarks prior to the filing date of the disputed trademark. A well-known trademark is recognized by the principles of on-demand recognition and case validity. Relevant facts in a prior effective judgment in which "VISA" had been recognized as a well-known trademark are different from those in the present case, and cannot serve as the natural basis for the trademark of this case to constitute a well-known trademark. The judgment of the first instance upheld the TRAB's ruling accordingly.

Entrusted by the Visa Association, Unitalen appealed to the Beijing High People's Court and the second instance litigation of the present case on its behalf, collected relevant evidence mainly on popularity of the trademark "VISA" before the filing date of the disputed trademark, including the search report from National Library and precedents, and submitted the evidence to the court of the second instance.

Judgment of the second instance:

The Beijing High People's Court, after the second instance, made the final judgment that: the evidence submitted can prove that prior to the filing date of the disputed trademark, the above two cited trademarks of the Visa Association were qualified as well-known trademarks in China, the dominant part of the disputed trademark is "VISA", which is similar to the two cited trademarks in terms of word composition, meaning, pronunciation and overall visual effect, and has constituted copy and imitation of the two cited trademarks, and the goods designated for use of the disputed trademark, such as "Liqueur", are daily goods closely related to the goods and services approved for use of the cited trademarks in terms of consumer groups, and are likely to make the relevant public think wrongly that the registrants of the disputed trademark and the cited trademarks are closely related, and confuse and misidentify the source of goods, which may damage the interests of the Visa Association that owns the well-known trademark. To sum up, the judgment of the second instance revoked the judgment of the first instance and the TRAB's ruling and ordered the CNIPA to make a new ruling.