This week, the TTAB decided the appeals from the three Section 2(d) likelihood of confusion refusals summarized below. At least one of the three refusals was affirmed. Let's see how you do in divining the results. [Answer will be found in the first comment.]
In re Jacqueline Anne Occasions, LLC, Application Serial No. 88264864 (April 20, 2021) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Robert H. Coggins). [Section 2(d) refusal of JACQUELINE ANNE OCCASIONS [OCCASIONS disclaimed] in view of the registered mark JACQUELINE EVENTS & DESIGN [EVENTS & DESIGN disclaimed], for overlapping wedding planning services. Applicant argued that the commercial impression of the marks differ because the cited mark is "highly suggestive of a person named JACQUELINE" whereas Applicant's mark identifies "JACQUELINE ANNE," a different person with a different name.]
In re Brilliant Massage Therapy dba Brilliant Massage & Skin, Serial No. 88903456 (April 21, 2021) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Cindy B. Greenbaum). [Section 2(d) refusal of BRILLIANT MASSAGE & SKIN for "Massage; Skin care salons; Health spa services, namely, cosmetic body care services" [MASSAGE & SKIN disclaimed], in view of the registered mark BRILLIANT AGING for "Wellness and health-related consulting services" [AGING disclaimed]. Applicant maintained that the marks look different and convey different commercial impressions, and further that the registrant does not provide massage therapy or other services similar to applicant's].
In re Spiritual Warrior Inc., Serial No. 88459695 (April 21, 2021) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Marc A. Bergsman). [Section 2(d) refusal of SHAKTI WARRIOR for athletic and yoga clothing and gear, including mats, in view of the registered mark SHAKTI WARRIORS for, inter alia, "educational services, namely, providing public appearances, classes, seminars, and workshops designed to educate the general public, patients and health care professionals on the importance of exercise and proper nutrition and emotional well-being and distributing corresponding educational materials." In arguing that the registered mark is entitled to only a narrow scope of protection, applicant submitted six third-party registrations for marks comprising or containing the term "shakti" in connection with yoga-related goods and services.].
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]