18 October 2024China PRC Trademarks Rankings 2024

CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office

Firm overview:

CCPIT PATENT AND TRADEMARK LAW OFFICE, with a history dated back to 1957, is the oldest full-service Chinese intellectual property law firm. We have 320 patent and trademark attorneys, more than 100 of whom have Chinese Lawyer's Qualification or passed bar examination of other jurisdictions.

Headquartered in Beijing, CCPIT provides one-stop professional services, including consultation, prosecution, mediation, administrative enforcement and litigation services, in relation to patents, trademarks, copyrights, domain names, trade secrets, unfair competition and other intellectual property-related matters. The firm has branch offices in New York, Tokyo, Madrid, Hong Kong, Guangzhou, Shanghai, Shenzhen and Wuhan.

Team overview:

Ling Zhao is an attorney at law in the International Trademark Department resident in the Beijing office. Her Supreme Court of China victories include a trademark invalidation litigation retrial representing a famous Swedish furniture company in 2022 and a series of trademark invalidation appeals before the Supreme People’s Court, representing a famous Danish pharmaceutical company in 2021.

Key matters:

  • CCPIT was successful in a civil litigation case for a client against alleged malicious trademark applications before Tianjin High Court by utilising anti-unfair competition laws. The case was recognised by the Supreme Court of China as one of China’s 50 typical IP cases in 2023.
  • From 2018, the defendant and its affiliates applied to register 32 trademarks, in multiple classes, identical or similar to the plaintiff’s trademark, which enjoys a high reputation and strong distinctiveness. The defendant was also accused of imitating the plaintiff’s business name and domain name, and engaging in misleading advertising, and of imitating the plaintiff’s operations.
  • The court of second Instance held the defendant’s trademark applications, as part of a comprehensive infringement, violated principles of honesty and credit, disrupted normal trademark registration processes, disturbed fair market competition, and harmed the lawful rights and interests of the plaintiff, constituting unfair competition as per Article 2 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law in China. The court awarded the plaintiff a full compensation of RMB 500,000 yuan.