“CYZ” vs. “SYZ, figure”

Applied-for mark “CYZ” of application No.4-2015-28838 for products “vehicles and their parts and accessories; land, air or water vehicle…” in the Class 12 under the name of Isuzu Jidosha Kabushiki (“Isuzu”) was rejected on the grounds that it’s confusingly similar to the cited trademark “SYZ, figure” of application No. 4-2015-13045, which has an earlier filing date, for products and services in Classes 12 and 35 of Ashan Technology and Trading Co., Ltd.

On behalf of Isuzu, Pham and Associates appealed the NOIP's decision to refuse registration, arguing that:

(i) The applied-for word mark "CYZ" is not confusingly similar to the cited mark "SYZ, figure" with earlier filing date because the letters C, Y, Z in the former are normal uppercase letters; whereas in the cited mark the letters S and Z are presented stylized as a goose and they have their heads turning into the capital letter Y in the middle. As a result, these two marks have different appearances and create different visual impressions;

(ii) The products for registration of both the applied-for and cited marks are transport means that are devices of a technical nature and related to the safety of human life; therefore, when choosing consumers will be very careful, it is difficult for them to confuse the two marks.

Reviewing the case, NOIP considers that the complaint is well-founded, and when checking the dossier, it is found that the cited mark "SYZ, figure" under application No.4-2015-13045 had been refused to registration according to the NOIP’s Decision No.89031/QD-SHTT of 11/12/2018 due to failure of payment of registration fees as prescribed and the time limit for filing a complaint against this Decision has also expired, so this no longer can be used as the cited mark to barrier the registration of the mark “CYZ”.