Ministry of Public Security Releases 10 Typical IP Infringement Criminal Cases of 2026

This analysis covers the trademark review decision for trademark application No. 86029499 for “LYNX” in China. The applicant is a Singapore-based entity.

The applicant filed review against the preliminary refusal of its “LYNX” trademark. It contended that its trademark differed substantially from the valid prior trademark “LYNXERA”, and the two parties operated in separate business fields with no likelihood of consumer confusion. To back its claims, the applicant presented dictionary records, product brochures, official website screenshots, media coverage and other evidence to prove the mark had gained popularity and independent distinctiveness through long-term use.

Upon re-examination, the China authority still held that the applied mark “LYNX” and the cited mark “LYNXERA” are similar in text and pronunciation, and their designated goods are categorized as similar goods. The submitted evidence was insufficient to prove the applied mark could be distinguished from the prior trademark in the market.

In accordance with Article 30 and Article 34 of China’s Trademark Law, the trademark application was ultimately rejected. This case proves that prior similar trademarks remain a major barrier to new trademark registration in China.