直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Vacates TTAB Decision Finding Likelihood of Confusion and Remands for Further Analysis of Third-Party Uses of Similar Marks in Use on Similar Services

October 27, 2025

Authored and Edited by Caleb D. Estes; Ryan V. McDonnell; Sonja W. Sahlsten

In Apex Bank v. CC Serve Corp., No. 2023-2143 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 25, 2025), the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a TTAB decision refusing to register Apex’s trademark based on likelihood of confusion.

The USPTO granted Apex’s application for the mark ASPIRE BANK for “banking and financial services.” CC Serve, a credit card service, initiated a successful opposition at the TTAB based on its ASPIRE mark for “credit card services.” Apex appealed, arguing that the TTAB erred in analyzing three of the DuPont factors for evaluating likelihood of confusion, namely the first (overall similarity of the marks), second (similarity of goods and/or services), and sixth (third-party use of similar marks) factors.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s findings on the second factor and vacated its findings on the first and sixth factors. For the second factor, the court found that substantial evidence supported the Board’s analysis that “credit card services” and “banking and financial services” are similar, as each encompasses extending credit and the issuance of credit cards. For the sixth factor, the court found that the Board erred in considering evidence of third-party uses of similar marks for only credit card-related services to the exclusion of the broader financial services industry. The court clarified that the third-party use analysis should consider not only identical services but similar ones. Finally, the court vacated the Board’s analysis on the first factor because the overall similarity of the marks may be informed by the Board’s reconsideration of the sixth factor under the correct standard for third-party use. The court remanded for the TTAB to consider the number and nature of similar marks on similar goods and the appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression of the marks in light of its finding that the parties’ services are highly similar.

Tags

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB)

Related Practices

Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy

Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals

Trademark and Brand Management

Trademark Oppositions and Cancellations

Related Industries

Communications

Financial Services and Business Systems

Related Offices

Atlanta, GA

Washington, DC

Contacts

Caleb D. Estes
Associate
Atlanta, GA
+1 404 653 6442
Email
Ryan V. McDonnell
Associate
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4167
Email
Sonja W. Sahlsten
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4329
Email

Copyright © 2025 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.

Related Insights

Lecture

IPIC/McGill Summer IP Course 2026: Understanding Trademarks

July 14, 2026

Montreal

Conference

7th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy

June 25-26, 2026

Edinburgh

Conference

17th Summit on Biosimilars & Innovator Biologics

June 2-3, 2026

New York

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

Before the Holding, the Message: Director Squires Uses Magnolia Medical to Outline PTAB Discretionary Denial Policy Changes

May 20, 2026

Conference

19th Annual Forum on Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation in Europe

May 19-20, 2026

Amsterdam

Webinar

Changes at the PTAB from Settled Expectations to Real Parties in Interest to Director Involvement

May 18, 2026

Webinar

Conference

Best Practices and Tech in Intellectual Property Conference 2026

May 17, 2026

Tel Aviv

Articles

COPPA’s Amended Rule Is Now in Full Effect: What Operators Need to Know

May 15, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP