Source: https://ttabcenter.com/ttabcase/roure-roure-llc/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 10:44:45+00:00

Document:
for Roure & Roure, LLC.
to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive.
After the Examining Attorney made the refusal final, Applicant appealed.
to use the mark in commerce.
2 Registration No. 5315827 issued on the Principal Register on October 24, 2017.
goods or services of the applicant, to cause confusion, mistake, or deception. 15 U.S.C.
Inc., 450 F.3d 1378, 78 USPQ2d 1944, 1947 (Fed. Cir. 2006); ProMark Brands Inc. v.
GFA Brands, Inc., 114 USPQ2d 1232, 1242 (TTAB 2015).
3 March 2, 2018 Office Action at 5-16.
marks alone was determinative in finding no likelihood of confusion. Id. at 7, 10-17.
73 USPQ2d 1689, 1691 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (quoting du Pont, 177 USPQ at 567).
marks would be likely to assume a connection between the parties. Coach Servs. Inc.
In re Coors Brewing Co., 343 F.3d 1340, 68 USPQ2d 1059, 1062 (Fed. Cir. 2003)).
in the context of the similarity of the goods. 6 TTABVUE 8.
in the marks. 4 TTABVUE 4.
3, but Applicant focuses on the claimed differences in meaning and commercial impression.
Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting CBS Inc. v.
Morrow, 708 F.2d 1579, 218 USPQ 198, 200 (Fed. Cir. 1983)).
to be impressed upon the mind of a purchaser and remembered. Presto Prods., Inc.
differentiate otherwise identical marks. See, e.g., Stone Lion Capital Partners, LP v.
8 March 8, 2018 Response to Office Action at 9.
Applicants mark is likely to be viewed as a shortened variation on the cited mark.
appearance to the cited standard character mark GO FRESH BY KINETIC.
that the marks are similar in sound.
the meaning of not stale (i.e. fresh) food, and is a play on the term GO STALE (i.e.
different meaning on the goods on which the mark is encountered by consumers. Id.
matters for judicial notice under Rule 201(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Cf. Boswell v.
word usage of record, they could easily have done so through testimony.).
commercial impression as posited by applicant for its liquid containers. Id.
entitled in the absence of other evidence of the strength or weakness of the mark.
meaning is highly similar in both instances.
11 March 2, 2018 Office Action at 2.
relative weakness of GO FRESH does not render the marks less similar in meaning.
necessary to support a conclusion of likely confusion declines.).
Inc. v. Houston Computs. Servs. Inc., 918 F.2d 937, 16 USPQ2d 1783, 1787 (Fed. Cir.
matter of degree. In re Shell Oil Co., 992 F.2d 1204, 26 USPQ2d 1687, 1689 (Fed. Cir.
vacuum bottles; vacuum bottles; water bottles sold empty.
beverages; household storage containers for pet food.
of confusion with respect to any of the goods in that class. Tuxedo Monopoly, Inc. v.
establishing a relationship between the goods with evidence.
application and registration are thus legally identical.
12 March 8, 2018 Response to Office Action at 7.
claimed different commercial impressions of the marks.
accessed on December 17, 2018).
temperature) for later use. Id.
15 March 2, 2018 Office Action at 5-8.
Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1005 (Fed. Cir.
2002)). We do not find the Examining Attorneys argument persuasive in any event.
used for a pool filter per se, but rather for a component.
host of other goods are also sold does not show that the identified goods are related.
19 March 2, 2018 Office Action at 5-11.
bottles identified in the application and the thermal insulated containers for . . .
that those goods are related.
containers are similar in purpose or complementary in use.
the Class 11 goods in the application.
notwithstanding the similarity of the marks.
refusal to register as to the goods in Class 11 is reversed.

References: v.

 v.

 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v.