December 4, 2017
Authored and Edited by Jonathan Uffelman; Naresh Kilaru; Julia Anne Matheson
In a non-precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit affirmed that in an ex parte proceeding, when analyzing the likelihood of confusion between a registered and an applied-for mark, evidence extrinsic to the application and cited registration may not be used to distinguish the commercial impressions made.
P.T. Arista Latindo applied to register the mark SENSI for adult and baby diapers, and diaper inserts. The Examining Attorney refused registration, finding SENSI was likely to cause confusion with previously registered marks for SENSI-CARE that covered, among other things, medicated diaper rash ointments and lotions. Arista appealed to the TTAB, arguing that the marks were dissimilar, the goods were unrelated, and there was no evidence of actual consumer confusion. The Board disagreed. According to the Board, the goods, channels of trade, and classes of customers were all similar, as were the marks as a whole. The Board also rejected Arista’s argument that evidence extrinsic to the registration and application could be used to differentiate the marks.
On appeal to the Federal Circuit, Arista argued the Board should have considered Arista’s extrinsic evidence, which showed that its website used the tagline “Sensible way of living” near the mark SENSI at the top of its webpages. According to Arista, given its website, customers would assume “SENSI” means “sensible,” whereas the cited registrations for SENSI-CARE, in context, refer to the term “sensitive.” The Federal Circuit disagreed.
The Federal Circuit stated that under well-settled precedent, “[w]hen determining the meaning of two marks, it is the marks themselves, as set forth in the application and cited registration, not extrinsic evidence, which determines likelihood of confusion.” Trade dress can be changed at any time and so cannot be used to prove differing commercial impressions. The Court further rejected Arista’s argument that dictionary evidence showed that SENSI can be understood to mean “sensible.” Artista’s cited dictionary did not define SENSI at all, but only noted that the word “sensible” was “nearby” alphabetically. Nothing in the application indicated SENSI should be understood to mean “sensible,” and the slogan “Sensible way of living” did not appear in the application.
Because the products were so closely related and nothing in the registrations or application provided any basis to find the terms would be understood differently, the Court affirmed the Board’s decision.
The case is In re: P.T. Artista Latindo, Case No. 2017-1292 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 13, 2017).
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), likelihood of confusion
Copyright © 2017 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.
Lecture
Patent Protection for Software-Related Inventions in Europe and the USA Training Course
June 5, 2024
Hybrid
10th Annual Georgia Asian Pacific American Bar Association Gala
May 29, 2024
Atlanta
Workshop
Life Sciences Workshop: Updates and Key Trends in Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology IP Law
May 2, 2024
Cambridge
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.