The trademark examination applies the principle of individual examination. It is to examine whether the legality and appropriation do exist in a real case. The Intellectual Property Office, Ministry of Economy shall consider different real cases to correctly find facts and apply law without being bound by other cases. Here, Plaintiff asserted cases where the wording of a trademark includes some characters which are the same as the trademark here used for opposition. The drawings and designated products of those trademarks are all different from the present case. The cases are different. So, it is hard to favor the assertion that both trademarks are not similar. As for the determination of trademark similarity, it relies on the forms of two trademarks shown in front of relevant consumers to make a decision. It is not an element for acquiring a trademark to rely on the trademark applicant’s subject idea for the design or to see whether there exists a subjective intent to copy. Therefore, even though the trademark at dispute indeed comes from the name of Plaintiff’s company and particularly adopts the speaking of a part of the name, which does not affect the determination of whether similarity exists.

Trademark opposition, well-known trademark, principle of individual examination, trademark similarity, confusion