In the invalidation action against the trademark  No. 24725443, PATMARK ATTORNEYS, on behalf of GUANGZHOU TIGER HEAD BATTERY GROUP CO., LTD, filed a response. The applicant claimed that they have prior copyright and have put the copyright into use and made certain influence. PATMARK ATTRONEYS accepted the entrustment of TIGER HEAD BATTERY GROUP and undertook extensive evidence collection. It can prove that the actual use of the subject mark by TIGER HEAD BATTERY GROUP can be traced back to 1980s through massive fact and evidence, which is earlier than the formation time of applicant's prior copyright and prior use time. Thus, the applicant did not have any prior right.

Upon examination, the CNIPA held that the applicant did not submit any evidence that is related to its copyright, including the creation, the time of formation, the time of the first public publication within the meaning of the Copyright Law and the time of copyright registration. Thus, it can't recognize that the applicant has copyright against the device mark. Further, the evidence submitted by the applicant is insufficient to prove that the applicant has taken certain effect by using the mark identical or similar to the disputed mark in respect of identical or similar goods, such as batteries. Therefore, the applicant's claims are untenable. The registration of disputed mark shall be maintained.

In this case, PATMARK ATTORNEYS proves that the actual use of the subject mark by TIGER HEAD BATTERY GROUP starts from 1980s through collecting evidence. They continue to use the subject mark three years before the date of filing the invalidation action. PATMARK ATTORNEYS directly blocks the applicant's grounds of invalidation action and successfully defends the trademark right of TIGER HEAD BATTERY GROUP.