{"id":218,"date":"2026-04-19T10:48:26","date_gmt":"2026-04-19T01:48:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.madrid-system.jp\/?p=218"},"modified":"2026-04-19T14:42:43","modified_gmt":"2026-04-19T05:42:43","slug":"jpo-appeal-case-study-e-connect-vs-connect-similarity-refusal-overturned","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.madrid-system.jp\/?p=218","title":{"rendered":"JPO Appeal Case Study: \u201ce-CONNECT\u201d vs. \u201cCONNECT\u201d \u2013 Similarity Refusal Overturned"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>This case illustrates how the Japan Patent Office (JPO) evaluates similarity when a trademark includes a prefix such as \u201ce-\u201d combined with a common word.<br>It demonstrates that even when a mark contains a well-known term, the addition of a prefix may create a distinct overall impression if the mark is perceived as a single unit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\">\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"i-0\">1. Application Details<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Mark:<\/strong> e-CONNECT<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Application No.:<\/strong> Japanese Trademark Application <strong>No. 2019-129668<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Designated Services:<\/strong> Financial and related services in <strong>Class 36<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\">\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"i-1\">2. Refusal by the JPO Examiner<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The application was refused under <strong>Article 4(1)(xi)<\/strong> of the Japanese Trademark Act (likelihood of confusion with a prior registered trademark).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The examiner cited the following earlier trademark:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Cited Mark:<\/strong> CONNECT<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Registration No.:<\/strong> <strong>6186035<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Designated Services:<\/strong> Various services in <strong>Class 36<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>The examiner concluded that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>the dominant element of the applied mark is <strong>\u201cCONNECT,\u201d<\/strong> and<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>the prefix \u201ce-\u201d is insufficient to distinguish the marks.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\">\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"i-2\">3. Appeal to the JPO Trial and Appeal Board<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>An appeal was filed against the refusal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Appeal No.:<\/strong> <strong>2021-9795<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>The appeal argued that the mark should be evaluated <strong>as a whole<\/strong>, including the prefix \u201ce-\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\">\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"i-3\">4. Decision of the Appeal Board<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The JPO Appeal Board <strong>reversed the refusal<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Board found that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The mark <strong>\u201ce-CONNECT\u201d<\/strong> is perceived as a <strong>single, unified expression<\/strong>, not as a separable combination.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The prefix <strong>\u201ce-\u201d<\/strong> is not merely descriptive in the relevant service field and cannot be ignored.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>The Board further noted that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The applied mark produces the pronunciation <strong>\u201ce-connect,\u201d<\/strong> which differs from <strong>\u201cconnect.\u201d<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Conceptually, the applied mark has <strong>no specific meaning<\/strong>, while the cited mark conveys the meaning \u201cto connect.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Based on these differences, the Board concluded that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>the marks are distinguishable in <strong>appearance, sound, and meaning<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\">\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"i-4\">5. Outcome<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The Board determined that the marks are <strong>not similar<\/strong>, and the refusal was set aside.<br>The trademark <strong>\u201ce-CONNECT\u201d<\/strong> was allowed to proceed toward registration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\">\n\n\n\n<h1 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"i-5\">Key Point for Foreign Applicants<\/h1>\n\n\n\n<p>This case highlights an important principle in Japanese trademark practice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>1. Prefixes can contribute to distinctiveness<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Even short prefixes such as \u201ce-\u201d may affect the overall impression.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>2. Whole-mark evaluation is decisive<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The JPO evaluates trademarks as a <strong>unitary expression<\/strong>, not by isolating one element.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>3. Additional sounds can avoid similarity<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The presence of an extra syllable (e.g., \u201ce-\u201d) may create a clearly distinguishable pronunciation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\">\n\n\n\n<p>\u2705 <strong>Practical takeaway<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In Japan, a trademark may be considered <strong>dissimilar<\/strong> even if it contains a common word, where:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>a prefix or additional element forms a <strong>unitary expression<\/strong>, and<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>the overall <strong>appearance, pronunciation, and meaning differ<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This case illustrates how the Japan Patent Office (JPO) evaluates similarity when a trademark includes a prefi &#8230; <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-218","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-successful-cases-in-japan","7":"entry","8":"nothumb"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.madrid-system.jp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.madrid-system.jp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.madrid-system.jp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.madrid-system.jp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.madrid-system.jp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=218"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.madrid-system.jp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":219,"href":"https:\/\/www.madrid-system.jp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218\/revisions\/219"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.madrid-system.jp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=218"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.madrid-system.jp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=218"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.madrid-system.jp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=218"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}