4 Things to Consider When Your Trademark Application is Refused based upon A Likelihood of Confusion with Another Mark
You applied for your Trademark Registration months ago. You then started to build your brand or business around this mark. You thought everything was alright until one day, months after filing for the mark, you receive a letter from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (hereinafter “USPTO”) informing you that your Trademark Application has been refused based upon a likelihood of confusion with another mark. Angry and confused you cannot understand why the refusal was issued. Your mark is not identical to the one blocking the registration thereof. How could this be? Concern grows to panic as you begin to ponder the costs associated with moving away from this mark and selecting and entirely new one – one which you can protect and maintain rights in.
Before you do so, however, take heart – you may yet get your trademark registered. To do so, however, you must understand how the system works and what can be done to get your original trademark registered.
First it is important to understand how the USPTO works in regard to registering trademarks. The USPTO employs anywhere from 250 to 350 trademark examining attorneys to review the roughly 220,000 trademark applications that are submitted for registration every year. One of the critical elements of their jobs is to evaluate whether an applied-for trademark would be likely to cause confusion with another trademark which is either registered or already awaiting registration.
If they determine your trademark application is similar to a prior filed but yet to be registered trademark (i.e., an advisory regarding a “prior pending mark”) or a registered mark (i.e., refusal based upon Section 2(d) of The Trademark Act) they will refuse to register your trademark. What every applicant needs to understand at this critical point is that this is a preliminary refusal and it is still possible to argue your mark through to registration at this point. In considering whether you can still get the mark registered here are four factors which we suggest being examined in accessing whether you will be able to get your trademark through to registration:
1. The DuPont Factors
Every refusal to register a trademark based upon a likelihood of confusion is based upon the examining attorney’s belief that the trademark applied for would be likely to cause confusion with a prior pending or registered trademark. This determination is made by and through the examining attorney’s application of the DuPont factors as between the two trademarks at issue. In short, to determine whether there is a likelihood of confusion the examining attorney considers the following factors:
a. The Similarity of the Appearance of the Trademarks;
b. The Similarity of the Goods or Services with which the Trademarks are used;
c. The Similarity of the Manner in Which the Goods or Services under the Respective Trademarks are Marketed;
d. The Similarity of the Trade Channels or the Manner in Which the Goods or Services Under the Respective Trademarks Reach the Ultimate Consumer;
e. Whether there is Proof of Actual Confusion among Relevant Consumers as to the Source of the Goods or Services provided under the Respective Trademarks; and
f. The Length of Time of Co-existence in the Marketplace of the Respective Trademarks without any Actual Confusion.
As such, the first step in determining whether an Office Action Response can be crafted to convince the examining attorney to withdraw the refusal and allow your mark to register is whether, under these factors, your trademark truly is likely to cause confusion with another’s prior pending or registered trademark.
Use the list above and go through each methodically in regard to your and the cited trademark(s). For each factor listed, determine whether that respective factor favors the examining attorney’s position that confusion would be likely or your position that it would not. If it favors the examining attorney’s position, place an “EA” next to the factor. If it favors your position that the other trademark should not block the registration of your mark place an “R” next to the factor.
After you have completed this exercise count up how many “EA”s and “R”s you have. If you have been objective about it and the number of “R”s outnumber the number of “EA”s then you have a good chance of getting the mark past the refusal with a well-written Office Action Response. If, however, the “EA”s outnumber your “R”s then the odds are not good that you will be able to convince the examining attorney to withdraw his or her refusal to register the mark.
Of note, in either event consulting an experienced Trademark Attorney will assist you in evaluating the refusal and in preparing a response thereto as they retain significant experience in applying the standards above and crafting Office Action Responses designed to get your trademark registered.
2. Priority of Use
In addition to the above, whether or not the DuPont factors favor the registration of your trademark there is an additional consideration one should always consider when examining whether a successful argument can be made for registration: Priority of Use.
In short, if the blocking trademark has been registered for less than five (5) years or has yet to register and you began actual use of your trademark in interstate commerce prior to the use of the registered trademark or prior pending mark or date the blocking trademark was filed for with the USPTO you may retain further options in getting your mark registered and past the refusal issued by the examining attorney.
If you do retain priority of use over the blocking mark you may move to cancel a registered mark for up to its first five (5) years of registration or may file a notice of opposition if the mark has yet to register. Note, both a Cancellation Proceeding and an Opposition Proceeding are often long, complicated tasks. An experienced Trademark Attorney should be employed to evaluate and prosecute the same should you consider this option.
Ultimately the goal of the litigation proceedings is to either cancel the blocking registered trademark (Cancellation Proceeding) or to stop the registration of the same (Opposition Proceeding) so as to clear the path for the registration of your mark. As such, anyone considering taking such action should also be aware that the USPTO routinely accepts consent agreements between parties to support the registration of a mark blocked by another. Accordingly, even if you do not have the resources to prosecute a Cancellation Proceeding or Opposition Proceeding to its end you may be able to use the same to negotiate a Consent Agreement from the blocking trademark’s owner which, upon submission to the examining attorney, would permit your trademark to register over the refusal.
Of note, to garner the consent to register your mark from the owner of the blocking mark is not required to be done by and through litigation. Often a consent to register a mark may merely be secured by submitting a Cease and Desist Letter to the blocking mark’s owner with an ultimate goal to secure the same’s consent to your registration. Again as before, an experienced Trademark Attorney should be employed to evaluate and prosecute the same should you consider this option.
3. Fraud
But what happens when you have received a refusal, conducted your due diligence, and believe that neither the DuPont factors nor Priority of Use favor the registration of your mark? What then? There are two other factors we suggest that you consider before giving up on your trademark. The first is whether the blocking mark’s owner committed fraud in the registration or application for their trademark.
In this context, it is important to note that fraud has a legal definition which shifts with each case decided on the point. Generally speaking, however, if you can discover what appears to be willful mistruths in the application for a blocking trademark you may be able to use those to inspire the owner thereof to enter into a consent agreement or even cancel their own mark under a threat of a Cancellation Proceeding or Opposition Proceeding.
What, might you ask, should you look for? Some examples are as follows:
a. Use in Interstate Commerce. Is the blocking trademark holder using its mark in commerce in more than one state or is their use relegated to one state alone? Why is this important? You may only register a trademark with the USPTO that is in use in “interstate commerce.” “Interstate commerce” is loosely defined as commerce between states or between the U.S. and a foreign country. So if the blocking trademark owner has a web site and sells their goods throughout the country, they have interstate use. But if the blocking trademark owner is a one location restaurant in the middle of a state hundreds of miles away from any border, they may not have legitimate use in interstate commerce.
b. An Overly Expansive List of Goods or Services. If the blocking trademark’s listing of goods and services reads like a laundry list of every product known to man this may also be grounds to cancel or limit their application or registration. As such, it may inspire them to provide you with consent to register your trademark rather than to go through the cost of defending a Cancellation Proceeding or Opposition Proceeding they will ultimately loose.
In short, you may only register a trademark in connection with goods or services with which you use the mark. Many trademark holders make the mistake of being overly broad when they apply for their trademarks seeking to maximize the scope of their goods or services. The issue is, however, is that you are only permitted to maintain a registration for goods with which you actually use the trademark. A good example for this is marks used in connection with clothing. If the blocking registration lists 150 separate items of clothing yet you can only identify 2 or 3 of those goods being provided by the trademark owner in commerce, they may have been overly broad in their identification of goods and, correspondingly, their registration may be subject to cancellation or limitation to those goods with which they are actually using their trademark in a Cancellation Proceeding.
c. Dates of Use. Lastly, if you can determine that they were not using their trademark as early as they claim in their registration or application this may also be grounds for a Cancellation Proceeding or Opposition Proceeding. If this is uncovered, you may also wish to revisit your analysis under the Priority of Use section above.
As always, as the prosecution of such matters is rife with peril. As such, an experienced Trademark Attorney should be employed to evaluate and prosecute these matters on your behalf.
4. Abandonment / Discontinued Use
One last consideration in determining whether you can have your trademark registered past a refusal based upon a prior registered trademark is whether that trademark is, in fact, still in use. Trademarks, once registered, can exist for up to ten (10) years on the USPTO’s Principal Register without anything further being required to be filed to maintain the registration by the registrant. But what happens if the registrant goes out of business or stops using the trademark in that time frame? It still exists on the Principal Register to block the registration of your trademark but is no longer being used.
From time to time we come across such situations and, when they occur, we typically file a simple Cancellation Proceeding to which no answer is received. You may then win by default within weeks of the case being filed thus clearing the path for the registration of your mark.
Once again, as before, use and abandonment have statutory definitions and especially in consideration that if you choose this option the other party may have priority of use over the use of your mark you should employ an experienced Trademark Attorney to evaluate and prosecute these matters on your behalf.
Processing your request, Please wait....
