TTABlog Quiz: Are entertainment and clothing related to the goals of section 2(d)? – Trademark

To print this article, all you need to do is register or login to Mondaq.com.

[Here is the 100th TTAB decision this year in a Section 2(d)
appeal. So far the Board has reversed four of the refusals.] The USPTO denied the trademark. NOMAD MOVEMENT for entertainment services related to travel and sustainable living, which may lead to confusion with the registered mark NOMAD MOVEMENT for “Headwear; Hats, namely hats and caps; Hoodies; Shorts; T-shirts; Mikey; Hoodies. How do you think this appeal came about? In re Jordan Saglioserial number 88593965 (May 31, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion of Judge Peter V. Cataldo).


Signs: The word THE “usually has no meaning for distinguishing one sign from another.” Applicant Salho argued that NUMBER means wandering from place to place, while NOMILIA means promoting the general idea of ​​moving away from the traditional home and working in favor of a mobile, technology-based life anywhere. The Board noted, however, that there was no written evidence to support the conclusion that the addition of the word THE had such an impact on the applicant’s trademark connotations. Moreover, even if the signs have different connotations, the similarity in appearance and sound still strongly supports the conclusion of a likely confusion.


Products and service: Investigating Attorney Marlene Bell presented evidence of a third party using the same trademark and brand name to determine the source of entertainment services and apparel: NINJA KIDZ!, THE PACK, DOCTOR WHO, GAME OF THRONES, SQUID GAME, NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC, and SMITHSONIAN. . She also filed thirty usage-based registrations covering both clothing and entertainment services.

Complainant Salho argued that the magistrate’s arguments would prevent the use of any mark resembling a clothing brand on any products, since trademark owners typically use their marks on clothing for promotional purposes. The Board indicated that the evidence here is indicative of current licensing and marketing practices for the provision of ancillary products as an adjunct to entertainment services).

Trade channels: The Saglio applicant attempted to isolate the actual channels of trade, but there were no restrictions on the channels of trade in the application or said registration, and the Board must therefore assume that the relevant services and goods move through all the usual channels. What’s more, the evidence comes from at least a common trade channel: entertainment sites and content producers that also sell promotional apparel.

Conclusion: Finding possible confusion, the Board confirmed the denial of registration.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject. For your specific circumstances, you should seek the advice of a specialist.

RELATED ARTICLES: US Intellectual Property

Comparative Trademark Guide

Obhan & Partners

Trademark Comparison Guide for Jurisdiction of India, check out our Comparison Guides section to compare multiple countries.


About the author


Leave a Comment