April 24, 2023
Authored and Edited by Deena Kablaoui Lanier; Caitlin E. Fowler; Esther H. Lim
In re Charger Ventures LLC, No. 2022-1094 (Fed. Cir. April 13, 2023), the Federal Circuit affirmed the TTAB’s decision denying registration of Charger’s trademark SPARK LIVING due to the likelihood of confusion with the earlier registered SPARK trademark.
The examining attorney refused to register SPARK LIVING for real estate, specifically rental property management, because SPARK had been previously registered for commercial property real estate services. Charger appealed the refusal to the TTAB and filed a request for reconsideration. The Board denied the request and affirmed the refusal.
On appeal, Charger challenged the Board’s factual findings on each DuPont factor, asking the CAFC to reweigh the evidence the Board considered. The Federal Circuit declined to do so, explaining that the legal question of likelihood of confusion is reviewed de novo, but the Board’s factual findings on each DuPont factor are reviewed for substantial evidence. The Court found that the Board properly considered each DuPont factor and had sufficient evidence to support its factual findings as to each factor. The Court did note that the Board failed to explain the weight of each factor on the ultimate decision, but nevertheless found that the Board’s reasoning was ascertainable and, on balance, sufficient evidence supported the Board finding a likelihood of confusion. Thus, the Court affirmed the Board’s decision.
Copyright © 2023 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.
At the PTAB Blog
Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a
§ 325(d) EPR Denial
May 28, 2026
At the PTAB Blog
IPR and PGR Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in March and April 2026
May 26, 2026
At the PTAB Blog
May 20, 2026
Webinar
Changes at the PTAB from Settled Expectations to Real Parties in Interest to Director Involvement
May 18, 2026
Webinar
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.