Important Paras • The appellant has argued that third party registrations in the record would indicate the reference registration is a 'weak' mark and therefore 'less likely to be confused.' The question still remains whether the marks viewed as a whole create a likelihood of confusion. Lilly Pulitzer, Inc. Lilli Ann Corp., (1967). Recent posts about Jupiter, Florida on our local forum with over 2,000,000 registered users. Jupiter is mentioned 4,690 times on our forum. Known Cities: Glen Rock, NJ, Glen Rock, NJ, Mendham, NJ Possible Relatives: Adele J Kurz, Anne Troast Hansen, Arthur P Troast, Katherine Troa Kurz. Mr Peter E Kurz, age 63. New York, NY, New York. The key to satisfied clients and partners is based on our experience since 1987 with an impressive testimony of the high-quality and reliable. Third party registrations have very little weight on the issue. Go to • The appellant acknowledges that 'there is no correct pronunciation of a trademark.' We think that one is very likely to pronounce 'Collegienne' as if it were spelled 'Colleejen' or 'Colleejun.' Thus, in sound, the appellant's mark differs from the registered mark primarily in that the former is the plural form of the latter, which we feel does not amount to a material difference in a trademark sense. Delaunay, (1957). We feel that the two very similar marks, when applied to the same goods, would create a likelihood of confusion. Go to • The decision of the board is affirmed. BALDWIN, Judge. This is an appeal from the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board rendered October 28, 1966 rejecting the application of Belgrade Shoe Company for registration of its trademark COL'EEJUNS' as applied to women's and girls' shoes on the Principal Register. The examiner's refusal is under section 2(d) of the Trademark Act of 1946 ( ), based on the registered mark COLLEGIENNE as applied to shoes of leather, rubber, fabric and combinations, girls' and junior girls' hats, coats, suits, dresses, sweaters, skirts, and blouses. Summarized at 152 USPQ 836. 174,488, filed August 6, 1963. Registration No. 196,993, issued April 7, 1925, renewed April 7, 1945, and again according to the board opinion. Dual monitor wallpaper for mac. Nyc Based Arthur Troast C.p.a. OfficeThe basis of rejection is that the appellant's mark so closely resembles the registered mark in sound and in meaning as to create likelihood of confusion, mistake, or deception when used on the identical and closely related goods. The appellant acknowledges that 'there is no correct pronunciation of a trademark.' We think that one is very likely to pronounce 'Collegienne' as if it were spelled 'Colleejen' or 'Colleejun.' Thus, in sound, the appellant's mark differs from the registered mark primarily in that the former is the plural form of the latter, which we feel does not amount to a material difference in a trademark sense. Delaunay, (1957). We feel that the two very similar marks, when applied to the same goods, would create a likelihood of confusion. Nyc Based Arthur Troast C.p.a. OfficeThe appellant has argued that third party registrations in the record would indicate the reference registration is a 'weak' mark and therefore 'less likely to be confused.' The question still remains whether the marks viewed as a whole create a likelihood of confusion. Lilly Pulitzer, Inc. Lilli Ann Corp., (1967). Third party registrations have very little weight on the issue. The decision of the board is affirmed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |