08 May

Sticky

KENFOX Attends the INTA Annual Meeting 2026 in London: Expanding Perspectives, Strengthening Global Connections, and Enhancing Professional Capacity

From 2 to 6 May 2026, a three-member delegation from KENFOX IP & Law Office attended the INTA Annual Meeting 2026 in London - one of the world’s largest and most influential events in the field of intellectual property (IP), bringing together thousands of lawyers, professionals, corporations, and IP organizations from numerous jurisdictions....

07 April

0 Comments

Sticky

Trademarks or Disguised Advertising Messages: CNIPA’s Proactive Invalidation of Granted Trademarks – Could Vietnam Adopt a Similar Approach?

Posted by Quoc Anh

in Notable Articles, Trademark, Trademark

Download The Situation in China: A Drastic Purge of "Pseudo-Concepts" In recent times, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has sent shockwaves through the legal and business communities by consistently implementing measures to refuse and proactively invalidate a series of trademarks that are ambiguous, deceptive,, or likely to mislead consumer perception. The review process reveals that numerous applications were summarily rejected during the substantive examination stage, most notably: 18 "Zero Sucrose" trademarks, 22 "0 Sucrose" trademarks, and others such as "Earth from the Mountains" and "0 Added West." Notably, since 2025, CNIPA has expanded its oversight beyond the examination stage to proactively...

03 April

0 Comments

Sticky

China: CNIPA Proactively Refused and Invalidated Ambiguous-Concept Trademarks Such as “Zero Sucrose” and “Farm-Raised”

Posted by Quoc Anh

in News, Notable Articles, Trademark

Download Many enterprises do not design trademarks to distinguish their goods from those of others - the core function of a trademark. Instead, they exploit the system to "privatize" common industry terminology. They treat the trademark registration certificate as a "legal free pass" to monopolize advertising messages (such as "Zero Sugar" or "Farm-Raised"). Armed with these registered marks, they can then turn around and restrict competitors from using descriptive terms that everyone should inherently have the right to use. Cloaking vague and exaggerated descriptive terms under the guise of an "exclusively registered trademark" creates a false veneer of credibility. Consumers are easily...

25 March

0 Comments

Sticky

Opposition Against the Trademark “7 DAYZ” / “7 DAYS PREMIUM MENWEAR & Device”: 5 Lessons in Trademark Protection in Vietnam

Posted by Quoc Anh

in Notable Articles, Trademark

Download In intellectual property portfolio management, challenging a subsequent trademark application that "borrows" ideas while being disguised by stylized details remains a complex issue. Therefore, protecting brand identity extends beyond mere name registration; it is a strategic battle to safeguard the "zone of recognition" within the minds of consumers. In this context, the successful prevention of trademark application No. 4-2023-36026 demonstrates a crucial principle: an effective opposition dossier must be built upon a strict integration of legal analysis regarding the similarity of the signs and designated goods/services, alongside a practical assessment of how the brand is perceived, recalled, and competes in...

12 March

0 Comments

Sticky

Trademark Litigation And Litigation Process In Vietnam

Posted by Quyen Nguyen

in Notable Articles, Trademark

Download Vietnam’s intellectual property (IP) framework has evolved rapidly during the past two decades. Vietnam is a member of major multilateral agreements such as the Paris Convention, TRIPS Agreement, the Madrid Agreement/Protocol, the EU-Vietnam Free‑Trade Agreement and other bilateral agreements. These treaties and Vietnam’s Law on Intellectual Property (IP Law) (amended in 2022), Civil Code (2015), Civil Procedure Code (CPC) (2015), Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code and implementing decrees (Decree 65/2023/ND‑CP, Decree 99/2013/ND‑CP etc.) form the core of the country’s trademark system Vietnam offers several avenues for trademark owners to enforce their rights, including administrative actions, civil litigation, criminal prosecution, and border control measures....

25 February

0 Comments

Sticky

Nearly 1,000 U.S. Patent Applications Terminated – A Cross-Border Compliance Crisis and the Lessons to Be Learned

Posted by KENFOX IP

in News, Notable Articles, Patent

The USPTO has terminated the proceedings of nearly 1,000 patent applications after discovering serious irregularities in filings handled through a cross-border “intermediary” model. The matter was triggered when a U.S. agency was found to have submitted documents using unauthorized electronic signatures of registered practitioners and/or applicants, prompting the USPTO to issue Show-Cause Orders across the portfolio. The core of this legal scandal lay in fundamental breaches of integrity: the U.S. attorney acted merely as a “signatory of convenience”, had no direct engagement with the ultimate client, and failed to verify the authenticity of the submitted filings. As a consequence, nearly 1,000 patent...

24 February

0 Comments

Sticky

MEGA MGC COFFEE: A “Reversal” Strategy and Lessons in Trademark Rights Establishment in Vietnam

Posted by KENFOX IP

in IP Practice, Notable Articles, Trademark in Vietnam, Vietnam

In Vietnam's trademark registration practice, numerous international brand owners have been forced to withdraw from the market upon facing a critical deadlock: their applications were refused due to conflicts with prior-filed marks. When the likelihood of reversing such a refusal is deemed “very low”, the boundary between successfully introducing a multi-million dollar brand into a new market and leaving empty-handed often hinges solely on a timely strategic decision. The case of MEGA MGC COFFEE - South Korea’s second-largest coffee chain - in Vietnam serves as a compelling illustration of such a turning point. In what initially appeared to be a foregone...

23 February

0 Comments

Sticky

Trademark Application & Registration Process: A Comprehensive Guide For Foreign Enterprises in Vietnam

Posted by KENFOX IP

in Notable Articles, Viet Nam

Entering the Vietnamese market requires securing your trademarks early. Vietnam is a first-to-file jurisdiction - priority generally goes to whoever files first, not whoever used first. This means foreign businesses should register their trademark in Vietnam as soon as possible to prevent local “squatting”. Unregistered signs - well-known marks, trade names, and commercial indications protected against unfair competition - are statutorily protectable in Vietnam. However, establishing such rights through evidence of actual use and reputation is demanding and often uncertain. Accordingly, unregistered brands face heightened misuse risk, so registration remains the most reliable path to protection and enforcement. Registering your...

04 February

0 Comments

Sticky

Over 12,000 TECNO Mobile Phones Illegally Assembled in Lang Son: Criminal Case Initiated

Posted by KENFOX IP

in News, Notable Articles

On 24 April 2025, the Lang Son Provincial Police (Economic Police Division), in coordination with the Lang Son Provincial Market Surveillance Department, conducted an unannounced inspection of an illegal mobile-phone assembly site located at a workshop in Khon Pat Hamlet, Dong Kinh Ward, Lang Son City, Lang Son Province. Background of the TECNO Brand TECNO is one of the mobile-phone brands under Transsion Holdings, a smartphone manufacturer headquartered in Shenzhen, China. According to Canalys (as cited by VnExpress), in 2024 Transsion shipped approximately 106.7 million smartphones (representing 9% market share), ranking fourth globally behind Apple, Samsung, and Xiaomi; and, in Africa, Transsion’s...

24 November

0 Comments

Sticky

Patent Specification – How a Single Connector Word Can Decide the “Life or Death” of a Patent?

Posted by Dương Thúy

in Notable Articles, Patent, Vietnam

If you believe that the phrase “at least one of A, B, and C” in a patent specification always means “A or B or C”, it may be time to reconsider. In U.S. patent practice, the interpretation of this seemingly simple expression has sparked a debate lasting more than two decades – a debate that remains far from settled today. The controversy originates from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s landmark 2004 decision in SuperGuide Corp. v. DirecTV Enters., Inc. In SuperGuide, the court interpreted the phrase to mean “at least one of A, and at least one...