Determining whether there exists trademark use should consider several factors as a whole, such as planar figures, the layout of the format in digital, audiovisual materials or electronic media, typefaces, font sizes, whether exists special distinctiveness, and whether the mark is distinctive enough to make relevant consumers associate it with the designated product or service. The use of “hua tai lang” in Plaintiff’s TV commercial advertisement is only a small portion of the whole content of the advertisement. Therefore, the relevant consumers cannot acknowledge or recognize from the advertisement that the term “hua tai lang” is associated with Plaintiff’s products. Although the word or phrase of “hua tai lang” was used in Plaintiff’s advertisement, the use of “hua tai lang” was associated with other words or phrase, and such use was not alone. From the content of Plaintiff’s advertisement, it is impossible to know that the term “hua tai lang” has acquired independent distinctiveness. In addition, Plaintiff’s products were not named after “hua tai lang” or used “hua tai lang” as appearance. Thus, “hua tai lang” is not a name or appearance of Plaintiff’s products.

Trademark opposition, public examination, trademark use, distinctiveness, appearance