2007 Heo 6249 Trademark refusal
[General principles of similarity assessment]
Visual similarity concerns whether the words, graphics and symbols of the marks could be confused as indicators of origin. Assess their overall visual impressions as encountered separately, rather than relying solely on a side-by-side comparison.
(Earlier registered trademark)
Designated Goods: Lavender Oil, Skin Milk, Cosmetic Deodorant, etc.
Mark
[Applied for trademark]
Designated Goods: Artificial Eyelashes, Artificial Nails, etc.
Mark
[Similarity of the marks]
1. Appearance
“Ipum” and “Ipsum” use similar lettering and share the same letters apart from the additional “s” in the earlier mark. Their capitalization and overall visual presentation are alike.
2. The Pronunciation
Although their ordinary pronunciations differ, consumers encountering the marks separately may confuse the similar spellings and pronounce one as the other. Their pronunciations may therefore be identical or similar in actual perception.
3. The concept
Both are coined terms without a definite concept to compare.
[Similarity of the designated goods]
The applied-for mark's false eyelashes, eyelash adhesives and artificial nails are cosmetic goods similar to the earlier mark's skin milk, cosmetic deodorants, perfume and lipstick. They share sales outlets and consumers.
[Decisions]
The marks have similar overall appearances and designate similar goods. The court found a likelihood of confusion and refused registration.
This article reflects the information available when it was published. Contact us to discuss your circumstances.