## Facts

- Parfums Christian Dior Co. owned an international registration for the “J’adore” perfume bottle shape (a teardrop-like bottle with a small globe top and ornamented neck) for Class 3 goods.
- Dior sought extension of protection for the mark to China through the Madrid system.
- China’s trademark authority refused the extension on the ground that the sign lacked distinctive features under PRC Trademark Law Article 11.
- On administrative review, the Trademark Review & Adjudication body affirmed the refusal, reasoning the mark could not distinguish source and lacked distinctiveness.
- Dior challenged the refusal in court; both the first-instance and appellate courts upheld the administrative decision.
- Dior sought retrial review before the Supreme People’s Court (SPC).

## Issues

1. Whether a mark designated as three-dimensional in international filing documents must be examined as a 3D mark rather than as a 2D graphic.
2. Whether, for Madrid-based extensions, the application should be treated as “basically complete” when required representations and statements were made, such that missing partial views or similar formal elements must be curable through a reasonable opportunity to supplement.
3. Whether refusing an international extension without permitting correction of minor formal defects conflicts with uniform examination standards and procedural fairness for international applicants.

## Decision

- The SPC reversed the prior administrative decision and the lower-court judgments.
- The SPC ordered the trademark review authority to remake its decision on Dior’s application.
- The SPC held that the mark had been wrongly handled as if it were a 2D mark and that the applicant should have been allowed to correct formal deficiencies (such as incomplete multi-view depictions) when the international filing otherwise met basic requirements.

## Legal Principles

- When international filing materials expressly indicate that a mark is three-dimensional, the examining authority must assess it as a 3D trademark application throughout examination and review.
- For Madrid-based territorial extensions, if the applicant has completed international registration requirements and satisfied required representations/statements under implementing rules, application formalities are “basically complete.”
- If deficiencies concern only partial views or comparable formal elements, the authority should provide a reasonable opportunity to cure rather than rejecting the application outright.
- Distinctiveness determinations for non-traditional marks must be made using the correct characterization of the mark and a procedurally adequate record.

## Conclusion

The SPC set aside the refusal of Dior’s international 3D bottle mark extension to China, requiring authorities to examine the sign as a 3D mark and to allow reasonable correction of minor formal deficiencies in Madrid-based filings before denying protection.


Parfums Christian Dior Co. v. Trademark Review & Adjudication Comm. of the State Admin. for Indus. & Com. of PRC, Guiding Case No. 114 (Sup. People’s Ct. 2018)