The trial of this case has been concluded.
Entrusted agent ad litem: Zhang Lei, lawyer of Beijing cube law firm.
5640343 of CSCEC, and its main business is the same as the approved service category of “CSCEC” Trademark No.
The court made a ruling on November 6, 2017: rejecting the objection raised by the defendant CSCEC universal to the jurisdiction of the case.
Fourth, CSCEC global introduced in its official website “service projects” that “the company’s predecessor was the project management department directly under the system of China State Construction Engineering Corporation, which carried out asset restructuring with the legal entity directly under Jiangsu SASAC on March 21, 2002…”, and introduced the working experience of some of its personnel in CSCEC system in the “senior management team” section, The above facts are untrue and constitute false publicity as stipulated in Article 9 of the anti unfair competition law..
The court heard the case in public on November 26, 2018.
895822 “CSCEC”, and the approved services are construction information, construction, etc.
Entrusted agent ad litem: Xie Guanbin, lawyer of Beijing cube law firm.
As early as before the establishment of CSCEC global corporation, that is, before March 20, 2008, after continuous publicity and use, the trademark has been highly known and influential among the relevant public in China and even the world in terms of construction services, and constitutes an unregistered well-known trademark.
895822.
The approved use services are construction supervision, construction information, maintenance information, construction, factory construction, warehouse construction and repair.
Legal representative: Guan Qing, chairman.
(hereinafter referred to as CSCEC global), the court accepted it on January 13, 2016 and formed a collegial panel in accordance with the law.
The trademark applied for registration on September 29, 2006 and was approved for registration on December 28, 2009.
5640343 “CSCEC” and No.
The defendant, CSCEC global, refused to accept the ruling and appealed.
The defendant, CSCEC global, raised an objection to the jurisdiction of the case during the defense period.
* Gaoxin Road, high tech Zone, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province.
The above-mentioned acts of CSCEC global infringed the trademark right of CSCEC.
After hearing the case of trademark infringement and unfair competition dispute between the plaintiff China Construction Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as CSCEC) and the defendant CSCEC Global Construction Group Co., Ltd.
5640152 “China Construction”.
5640152 and similar to the “CSCEC” Trademark No.
law firm: Beijing cube law firm, Nanjing knowledge (Jiangbei new area) law firm, Nanjing intellectual property law firm mentioned: Beijing zero Market Research Co., Ltd., China Construction Industry Press, China Construction Engineering Corporation, China Asset Management Corporation, Xi’an Construction Engineering Trading Center, document text, civil judgment of Beijing Intellectual Property Court (2016) Jing 73 min Chu No.
* * Sanlihe Road, Haidian District, Beijing.
Entrusted agent ad litem: Li Jiazheng, lawyer of Nanjing knowledge (Jiangbei new area) law firm.
Address: No.
22 plaintiff: CSCEC defendant: CSCEC Global Construction Group Co., Ltd.
895822, and its main business is the same as the approved service category of “CSCEC” Trademark No.
In addition, CSCEC also enjoys the exclusive right to use the registered trademarks No.
The “CSCEC” logo used by CSCEC universal in its office space is the same and similar to the “CSCEC” Trademark No.
In addition, “CSCEC”, “CSCEC” and “CSCEC” are also the enterprise names of CSCEC.
Address: No.
The plaintiff appealed to the plaintiff China Construction Corporation, which sued that: first, China Construction Corporation is the exclusive owner of the Trademark No.
CSCEC has the right to bring a lawsuit in its own name against the infringement of the trademark before and during the transfer.
source: China judicial document network # 2019-05-29 case No.: (2016) Jing 73 min Chu No.
Legal representative: Ma Yajun, chairman.
Civil judgment of first instance between CSCEC and CSCEC Global Construction Group Co., Ltd.
5640343, which is easy to lead to confusion and misunderstanding by the relevant public.
CSCEC global uses the “CSCEC global” logo in prominent positions in its office and construction sites, completely replicating the “CSCEC” Trademark No.
The Beijing Higher People’s court made a ruling on June 13, 2018: rejecting the appeal and upholding the original ruling.
Defendant: CSCEC Global Construction Group Co., Ltd.
Entrusted agent ad litem: Shang Yaqiong, lawyer of Nanjing knowledge law firm.
The above infringement of trademark rights committed by CSCEC global also constitutes the unauthorized use of other people’s enterprise names, which leads people to mistakenly believe that it is an unfair competition for other people’s goods.
Second, CSCEC global registered an enterprise name with the name of “CSCEC”, used the full name of the enterprise name and the “CSCEC global” logo in a prominent position of the construction site, office space and its official website, and engaged in services that are the same or similar to the trademark involved, misleading the public and constituting unfair competition.
Third, the “CSCEC” logo used by CSCEC global in its office space is exactly the same as the “CSCEC” trademark of CSCEC No.
22 party information plaintiff: China Construction Co., Ltd.
Xie Guanbin and Zhang Lei, the entrusted litigation agents of the plaintiff China Construction Corporation, and Li Jiazheng and Shang Yaqiong, the entrusted litigation agents of the defendant CSCEC global, attended the court.
5640343.
