A refusal under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act (15 U.S.C. §1052(d)) involves an analysis of likelihood of confusion. When an Examining Attorney issues such a refusal, it means that they have determined that the applicant's mark, as used with the identified goods or services, closely resembles a previously registered trademark to an extent that it is likely to cause confusion. The evaluation of likelihood of confusion commonly revolves around the similarity of the marks and the relatedness of the goods or services. Whether a DuPont factor is considered depends on whether the applicant raises other factors and submits relevant evidence. For a comprehensive list of the thirteen factors outlined in the seminal case of In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 U.S.P.Q. 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973) that may be considered in a likelihood of confusion analysis.
While not necessarily the most crucial factors in this analysis, the following likelihood of confusion considerations should not be overlooked:
Third-Party Registrations:
Utilize third-party registrations to demonstrate that the cited mark against the applicant's mark is suggestive, descriptive, or commonly used by others in the industry, and that the public relies on other elements of the mark to distinguish the source. Third-party registrations can support the argument that a mark is weak under the crowded field theory, but they cannot justify the registration of another similar mark if it will cause consumer confusion. An applicant can use other registrations to show that a term is a weak component and thus entitled to limited protection.
International Classifications:
International classes have no relevance to the issue of likelihood of confusion. As an applicant, do not rely on the argument that because the cited mark falls under a different international classification, it cannot lead to source confusion. Such an argument will not succeed.
Similar Marks Owned by Different Parties:
If the Examining Attorney cites multiple marks against the applicant's mark, with different owners for each mark, it is important to highlight that dilution may have already occurred. This argument allows for the conclusion that if the mark or a similar element of the mark has already been diluted, there can be no likelihood of confusion.
Family of Marks Doctrine:
The family of marks doctrine refers to a group of marks sharing a recognizable common characteristic that the public associates with the source of the trademark. However, an applicant cannot rely on this doctrine to prevail in a likelihood of confusion refusal during an ex parte appeal. It can only be invoked in an inter partes proceeding by a plaintiff. See Baroid Drilling Fluids Inc. v. Sun Drilling Products, 24 U.S.P.Q.2d 1048, 1992 WL 473853 (TTAB 1992).
Prior Decisions by Examining Attorneys:
Avoid the mistake of attempting to hold an Examining Attorney to their previous decision. Trademark cases are highly specific to the facts of each case, and decisions are made based on their individual merits. In fact, prior decisions made by Trademark Examiners carry no evidentiary value. Such decisions do not bind the Examiner, nor do they bind the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB).
If you need legal advice regarding your trademark rights, assistance with trademark prosecution, or representation in a domain name dispute, contact Wilson Whitaker Rynell. Our team of trademark lawyers has extensive experience in all aspects of trademark and copyright law, including the filing of trademark applications and representing clients in defense or prosecution before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Getting in touch is easy. Use the form below and request a free consultation today.
Recognized in the legal industry as dedicated board-certified lawyers and Rising Stars.
Your project will be handled by legal experts every time. You will have the most experienced attorneys working for you.
Let's talk about your legal issue
Wilson Legal Group P.C.
d/b/a Wilson Whitaker Rynell
(972) 248-8080 (Dallas) MAIN OFFICE
(713) 830-2207 (Houston) Appointment Only
(512) 691-4100 (Austin) Appointment Only
For more information on how we can assist in your intellectual property, commercial litigation, divorce, or other personal needs, let us know how we can help you:
WILSON WHITAKER RYNELL
Thank You for Contacting Us!
Your information has been sent, and we will contact you shorlty...issues.
WILSON WHITAKER RYNELL
Oops, there was an error sending your message.
Please try again later.
Disclaimer:
This form does not establish an attorney-client relationship, and should only be used to contact the firm about scheduling a call or meeting. No confidential or sensitive information should be sent using this form.
We represent clients nationwide, including Dallas, Austin, Houston, and other Texas areas such as Fort Worth, Arlington, Carrollton, Plano, Allen, Lewisville, Flower Mound, Irving, Denton, McKinney, North Richland Hills, and all cities within Dallas County, Tarrant County, Collin County, and Denton County.
Wilson Whitaker Rynell
16610 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1000
Dallas, Texas 75248
972-248-8080 (MAIN)
972-248-8088 (FAX)
info@wrrlegal.com (E-MAIL)