Vmate Responds to Infringement Lawsuit: Trademark Rejection Unrelated to the Case

Recently, Philip Morris International (referred to as "PMI") has filed a lawsuit against Vmate Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. (founded in 2014, referred to as "VEEX") and its OEM factory Moke, accusing the two defendants of trademark infringement and unfair competition. A food store in Shanghai that sells VEEX e-cigarettes is also included in the lawsuit. VEEX has responded that it has received the lawsuit.
 
The Southern Metropolis Daily's e-cigarette industry research team found that the trademark application for "VEEX" in Class 35 has been rejected, but VEEX denies that this is related to PMI's lawsuit.

PMI: VEEX infringes on its PMI VEEV series trademark

PMI demands that the three defendants immediately cease infringement and jointly compensate for damages of 3 million yuan and reasonable expenses of 150,000 yuan for protecting their rights. PMI believes that VEEX has used a mark similar to its registered VEEV trademark in the production, sale, and promotion of its products and registered the domain name veextech for online promotion, while its OEM factory Moke and the food store produced and sold infringing products, which also violates trademark law.

VEEX stated to the Southern Metropolis Daily that regarding domestic trademark application issues, VEEX has been actively communicating with trademark management authorities. As a well-known domestic e-cigarette brand, the VEEX trademark has been widely used in the domestic market. Meanwhile, VEEX has initiated global trademark applications and has successfully applied in some countries and regions.

The Southern Metropolis Daily's e-cigarette industry research team found that VEEX Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. successfully registered the "VEEX" trademark in Class 34 for tobacco and smoking devices and Class 35 for advertising and sales in 2019, but the letter trademark "VEEX" in Classes 34 and 35 is still under substantive examination, while the application for "VEEX" in Class 35 has been rejected.

It is important to note that, according to the China Trademark Network, PMI obtained exclusive rights to the Class 34 tobacco registered trademark in May 2016 and April 2021, and registered with international priority.

From PMI's perspective, the VEEX mark used by the three defendants has not been approved for registration in Class 34 and is in the same category as its VEEV trademark, making it highly similar in letter arrangement, pronunciation, and overall visual appearance, which constitutes a similar trademark that is likely to confuse the public and constitutes trademark infringement and unfair competition.

PMI also pointed out that VEEX has used the "?" mark on product packaging and in offline store decorations, which constitutes the use of an unregistered trademark as if it were a registered trademark, violating Article 52 of the Trademark Law. The Southern Metropolis Daily noted that on VEEX's official website and public accounts, the brand logo is currently often displayed as "VEEX维刻" and frequently uses the "?" registered trademark symbol.

Review: Sued by Smoore Technology for Infringement in June

This is the second time VEEX has been sued in nearly a month. Last month, Smoore Technology requested the court to order VEEX to immediately cease infringement and eliminate the impact, while compensating for economic losses of 5.2 million yuan, claiming that VEEX and Moke produced and marketed compatible cartridges for RELX devices and used phrases like "RELX compatible cartridges" and "RELX and VEEX cartridges can be used interchangeably" in their marketing to attract consumers and gain improper benefits.

VEEX stated that the related accusations are unfounded and has entrusted a law firm to actively respond. Any further developments will be announced promptly. Currently, the case has been filed and passed court review on June 2 and was transferred to the trial court on June 3.