The court therefore overturned the initial conviction inciting the ire of Eveready. This led to a protest from the American company which brought forth evidence citing that Shen had previously in 1977 approached the Central Standards Bureau with the intent of registering the same trademark. The bureau refused the request. This, Eveready countered, should be sufficient enough basis for ruling against Shen's product.
經高等法院更審後，狼犬牌以圖形與名稱均不相同，無誤認混淆之虞，改判無罪，這下倒換永備不服氣了，理由是民國六十六年華聯曾以 GREYHOUND 商標向中央標準局申請註冊，卻因「與永備註冊的商標近似」而被駁回，法院應尊重中標局的見解。