Heze Registered Capital Of Less Than 10 Million Yuan Can Be Registered In The County.

Previously,

A company with a capital of 5 million yuan must go to the Municipal Industrial and commercial bureau for registration. Now it can be registered in its county seat. This afternoon, the public network reporter learned that, recently, the Municipal Industrial and commercial bureau issued the notice on further relaxing the jurisdiction of enterprise registration (hereinafter referred to as the notice). The newly established private enterprise has its name of provincial and municipal administrative divisions and its registered capital is less than 5 million yuan or less than 10 million yuan, which is registered in the county industrial and commercial (market supervision) Bureau in principle.

Reporters learned that the "notice" stipulates that the new establishment within the city

The name of the administrative divisions of the province and municipality with a registered capital of less than 5 million yuan is registered by the county industrial and commercial (market supervision) bureau.

The newly established private enterprises, whose names are provincial or municipal administrative divisions and whose registered capital is less than 5 million yuan or less than 10 million yuan, shall be registered in the County Bureau of industry and Commerce (market supervision) in principle.

Registration.

Enterprises whose registered capital is less than 2 million yuan will no longer approve the name of the administrative divisions of Guan City.

The newly established private enterprises, whose names are provincial or municipal administrative divisions and whose registered capital is more than 10 million yuan, is still registered by the Municipal Industrial and commercial bureau.

Liu Qiguang, deputy director of the enterprise registration bureau of the Municipal Industrial and commercial bureau and chief of the private section, told reporters that according to the original registration policy, the enterprises whose registered capital is more than 2 million yuan in the county where the enterprises live are registered with the Municipal Industrial and commercial bureau.

After the enterprise registration jurisdiction is decentralized, investors can register nearby, save time and cost, and make registration more convenient.

Related links:

Chuang Bo Asia Pacific (Shandong) Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Chuang Bo Asia Pacific) has referred the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to the intellectual property court of Beijing. It considers that it should have the ownership of WeChat trademark before applying for it.

Yesterday, the court decided in court to maintain the ruling of the business jury.

Yesterday morning, in the court, Chuang Bo Asia Pacific company asked the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to revoke the ruling of "WeChat" without approving the trademark, and claimed that it should be the owner of WeChat trademark.

It is understood that in November 2010, before Tencent Inc launched WeChat products, the Asia Pacific Company launched the application for registration of WeChat trademark.

According to the Business Review Committee, "WeChat" is a mobile chat software launched by Tencent Inc. WeChat trademark, which is registered by the Asia Pacific Company, is likely to cause consumers to misunderstand and cause bad social impact.

The business jury said that before the ruling was made, WeChat users had exceeded 400 million, taking into account the public interest, and in order to prevent WeChat users from misidentification, inconvenience and loss, they made a decision not to approve.

Chuang Bo Asia Pacific said that the trademark itself did not exist "bad influence" identified by the business judges.

In addition, they have worked with Shandong Unicom, "Tencent Inc users are not as large as we are."

After the court hearing, the collegial panel held that the trademark application should also take into consideration the public interest while respecting the principle of first application. When conflicts occur, the possibility of confusion of commercial signs should be eliminated as far as possible in the light of the objective reality of the market.

The evidence provided by the plaintiff does not prove that the "WeChat" product that it advocates has formed a large number of service groups, while WeChat users have formed a fixed cognition of the existing WeChat services.

Therefore, the court decided in court to maintain the ruling of the business jury.

The Bloomberg Asia Pacific side said in court that it would appeal.