Tiếng Việt
中文 (中国)
日本語
A trademark application in Vietnam may be refused because the proposed mark lacks distinctiveness, conflicts with an earlier trademark, falls within a category of signs prohibited by law, or does not satisfy other statutory requirements. Under Article 117 of Vietnam’s Law on Intellectual Property, an application may also be refused where the applicant lacks the right to register the mark, files in bad faith, or fails to satisfy the applicable first-to-file requirements. If the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (IPVN) issues a notice of intended refusal, the applicant should identify the precise legal grounds and respond within the prescribed deadline. A refusal notice does not necessarily mean that the application cannot be saved.
What Are the Main Reasons for Trademark Refusal in Vietnam?
The principal grounds for trademark refusal Vietnam applicants encounter concern distinctiveness, conflicts with earlier rights, prohibited signs, and the applicant’s entitlement to register.
The trademark lacks distinctiveness. Article 74 of the Law on Intellectual Property sets out the requirements for a mark to be capable of distinguishing the relevant goods or services. Names that merely describe a product’s characteristics, quality, ingredients, function, or geographical origin may be difficult to protect. Generic expressions and commonly used terms may also be refused where consumers would not perceive them as identifying a particular commercial source.
For example, a purely descriptive expression for a product may be unsuitable for registration unless an applicable statutory exception can be established. A distinctive combination of words and figurative elements may receive a different assessment, depending on the overall impression of the mark.
The mark conflicts with an earlier trademark. A common reason for trademark application rejection Vietnam businesses face is the existence of an earlier identical or confusingly similar mark covering identical or related goods and services.
The assessment is not limited to identical spelling. Under Article 74 and the relevant implementing criteria, the authority may compare pronunciation, meaning, visual presentation, and the relationship between the respective goods or services. Article 90 also establishes the first-to-file principle, subject to the applicable statutory provisions.
The sign is prohibited by law. Article 73 identifies signs that cannot be protected as trademarks, including specified official symbols and other legally restricted signs. Depending on the circumstances, a sign that falls within these prohibitions may be refused regardless of whether an identical trademark already exists.
The applicant lacks the right to register or files in bad faith. Article 87 addresses entitlement to register trademarks. Article 117 also provides for refusal where the applicant lacks the relevant right or files with bad faith, as applicable. An application may therefore face difficulties even where the proposed mark appears distinctive if the applicant is not legally entitled to seek protection or the filing circumstances support a bad-faith finding.
The applicable framework includes the Law on Intellectual Property as amended by Law No. 131/2025/QH15, effective from April 1, 2026, together with Decree No. 65/2023/NĐ-CP as amended, and Circular No. 10/2026/TT-BKHCN.
What Should You Do After Receiving a Trademark Refusal Notice?
The first step is to determine whether the IPVN has issued a notice of intended refusal or a final refusal decision. These are different procedural situations and require different responses.
If the notice states an intended refusal, review the reasons immediately. Identify each objection, the legal provision cited, the earlier trademark or other right relied upon, and the goods or services affected. Do not assume that a general explanation denying infringement or asserting ownership will adequately answer the examiner’s concerns.
Under Article 80(3)(b) of Circular No. 10/2026/TT-BKHCN, the IPVN specifies the reasons for an intended refusal and gives the applicant two months from the date of the notice to submit comments. The notice itself should be checked carefully to confirm the applicable deadline and any additional requirements.
A substantive response should address each objection separately and provide supporting legal arguments and evidence. Depending on the grounds, this may involve demonstrating differences between the marks, explaining why the relevant goods or services should not be considered similar, or providing evidence relevant to the mark’s distinctiveness.
Consider whether the application can be adjusted. Where the problem concerns only part of the goods or services, narrowing the specification may sometimes help. An applicant may also be able to address certain issues concerning disclaimers or non-distinctive elements in the mark. However, amendments must comply with the applicable procedural rules and cannot be assumed to cure every substantive defect.
If a conflicting earlier registration is cited, the applicant should verify its status and scope of protection. In appropriate circumstances, separate proceedings concerning the earlier right may be worth evaluating, but they do not automatically suspend or resolve the refusal of the pending application.
Businesses dealing with these issues may consult the process of registering trademark in Vietnam for an overview of the registration procedure and the importance of responding to examination objections.
Need help assessing the examiner’s objections? ASL LAW provides intellectual property services that can support businesses in evaluating refusal grounds, reviewing evidence, and determining an appropriate response strategy. Explore Vietnam IP Services for further information.
Can a Refused Trademark Application Still Be Registered?
Yes, in some cases. The outcome depends on the refusal grounds and whether the applicant can adequately address them within the applicable procedure.
An intended refusal based on alleged similarity may be challenged through a reasoned comparison of the marks, the relevant goods and services, and the earlier rights cited by the examiner. An objection based on distinctiveness may require a different strategy, potentially involving evidence of acquired distinctiveness where legally relevant.
However, not every refusal can be overcome. If a mark falls within a statutory prohibition or clearly conflicts with an earlier enforceable right, arguments based solely on the applicant’s commercial investment or intention to use the brand may be insufficient.
If the IPVN issues a final refusal after considering the applicant’s response, the applicant should review the decision and assess the available complaint or judicial challenge procedures under Article 119a of the Law on Intellectual Property and the applicable legislation. Deadlines are important, and a final refusal should not be treated as though it were still an open examination notice.
In some circumstances, adopting a more distinctive alternative mark and filing a new application may be more practical than continuing to challenge an application with fundamental legal obstacles. The appropriate choice depends on the commercial value of the existing brand, the scope of the refusal, and the prospects of success.
How Can Businesses Reduce the Risk of Trademark Refusal?
A refusal is often easier to prevent than to resolve after an application has entered substantive examination. Businesses should therefore assess registrability before committing substantial resources to a brand.
First, conduct a preliminary trademark search covering identical and potentially similar marks. Search results should be evaluated in relation to both the signs and the relevant goods or services rather than treated as a simple list of identical names.
Second, select a distinctive mark. Invented words, arbitrary terms, or distinctive combinations may present fewer inherent distinctiveness concerns than expressions that directly describe the product. Nevertheless, even a highly distinctive name may conflict with an earlier right.
Third, ensure that the applicant is entitled to register the mark and that the ownership information and supporting documents are accurate. This is especially important where the brand was developed by a founder, distributor, manufacturer, or affiliated entity.
Fourth, monitor official notices and respond within the prescribed deadlines. Failure to address a notice adequately may result in refusal even where the application might otherwise have had reasonable prospects.
Foreign companies should also verify their representation arrangements. A lawful Vietnam trademark registration agent can assist with application preparation and examination correspondence. Where refusal risks involve complex ownership questions, competing registrations, or potential disputes, an experienced Vietnam trademark law firm may help evaluate the legal grounds and available options.
Businesses planning protection beyond Vietnam should also assess the requirements in each target country. Registration in Vietnam does not automatically secure equivalent rights overseas, and an application strategy should reflect the territorial nature of international trademark protection.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Why is a trademark application refused in Vietnam?
Common reasons include lack of distinctiveness, similarity to an earlier trademark, prohibited signs, lack of entitlement to register, bad-faith filing, and failure to meet applicable procedural requirements.
2. How long do I have to respond to an intended trademark refusal in Vietnam?
Under Article 80(3)(b) of Circular No. 10/2026/TT-BKHCN, the applicant is given two months from the date of the notice to submit comments. Applicants should verify the notice and applicable procedural requirements immediately.
3. Can I overcome a refusal based on a similar earlier trademark?
Possibly. The applicant may be able to demonstrate that the marks or goods and services are sufficiently different under the applicable legal criteria. The outcome depends on the specific marks, earlier rights, and supporting arguments and evidence.
4. What happens if I do not respond to an intended refusal?
If the applicant does not respond within the prescribed period, or the response fails to address the deficiencies adequately, the IPVN may issue a final refusal under the applicable procedure.
5. Can I challenge a final trademark refusal in Vietnam?
A final refusal may be subject to a complaint or judicial challenge where permitted by law. The applicant should review the decision, identify the available procedure, and act within the applicable deadline.
ASL Law is a leading full-service and independent Vietnamese law firm made up of experienced and talented lawyers. ASL Law is ranked as the top tier Law Firm in Vietnam by Legal500, Asia Law, WTR, and Asia Business Law Journal. Based in both Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam, the firm’s main purpose is to provide the most practical, efficient and lawful advice to its domestic and international clients. If we can be of assistance, please email to [email protected].
ASL LAW is the top-tier Vietnam law firm for Intellectual Property Services. If you need any advice, please contact us for further information or collaboration.
