There is nothing similar to the appellant's trade mark. CTMR on the grounds stated in the previous correspondence. The customer would not see the mark prima facie as a trade mark depicting a particular trader. The fact that the mark may not be similar to other water filters does not render it automatically distinctive. The ornamental design on the outside of the mark is not considered distinctive.
Gaps are necessary in a water filter for the water to run through.
It seems that the design has a more functional character than an ornamental one. The sample survey of competitors' products does not demonstrate that consumers would see it as a trade mark. There is not sufficient evidence to draw that conclusion. If the trade mark consists only of the ornamental design on the outer surface of the water filter, then the application should not have been filed as a three-dimensional shape. As filed, the mark has to be considered as a whole.