Design Trademarks and How They are Treated by Examining Attorneys
ATTORNEYS IN DALLAS
The complexities of design marks and composite marks, their distinctions from word marks, and how they can be assessed for likelihood of confusion.
Design Trademarks and How They are Treated by Examining Attorneys
As trademark advisors, we frequently advise our clients regarding word marks. However, we dedicate less time to discussing design marks or composite marks, which are trademarks consisting of both words and design elements. Exploring this topic can be somewhat challenging since a significant portion of the analysis relies on visual aspects. Nonetheless, it remains crucial for our clients to grasp some general principles and understand the distinctions when it comes to conducting a likelihood of confusion assessment.
Design trademarks can exhibit several differences and still be deemed likely to cause confusion regarding their source. For instance, in the case of In re United States Distributors, Inc., 229 U.S.P.Q. 237, 1986 WL 83661 (TTAB 1986), a design trademark depicting a silhouette of a man and woman used in association with distributorship services in the health and beauty aids field was found to be likely to cause consumer confusion with another design mark featuring silhouettes of a man and a woman used for a skin cream product. On the other hand, in Red Carpet Corp. v. Johnstown American Enterprises Inc., 7 U.S.P.Q.2d 1404, 1988 WL 252364 (TTAB 1988), no confusion was established between a highly stylized house design used for real estate property management and a mark featuring another highly stylized house used for real estate brokerage services. These examples highlight that this particular area of law heavily depends on the specific facts of each case. While visual similarity remains a primary criterion for analysis, each determination is made on a case-by-case basis.
Legal Equivalents Doctrine
The doctrine of legal equivalents is often employed when assessing design trademarks for likelihood of confusion. This doctrine comes into play when a word mark evokes the same mental image as a pictorial representation. In other words, the consumer would have the same visual impression from the cited word mark as they would have from the applicant's design mark. An instance of this doctrine can be found in the case of In re Rolf Nilsson Ab, 230 U.S. P.Q. 141, 1986 WL 83581 (TTAB 1986), where it was determined that a silhouette of a lion's head and the letter "L" used to brand shoes were confusingly similar to the word mark "LION," also used for shoes. However, in certain situations where a design mark features a highly stylized image, there may be no likelihood of confusion with an equivalent word mark if the purchaser's mind does not evoke similar visual images.
Composite Trademarks
As previously mentioned, these marks incorporate both words and designs. It is important for applicants to be aware of a general principle that may provide grounds for the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) Examiners to refuse their trademark application. If one element of a trademark carries more significance than the other, greater emphasis can be placed on the more significant feature during a likelihood of confusion analysis. In the majority of cases, greater weight is given to the word component. This is because consumers typically use words to refer to and request goods or services, making the words more pivotal. Our experience indicates that the Courts demonstrate more flexibility in determining whether the words or design element should be considered dominant. However, the USPTO consistently tends to perceive the words as the primary feature.
Standard Character Marks and Special Form Marks
A drawing of the mark must accompany a U.S. trademark application. This drawing can be in standard characters, allowing the trademark owner to use any depiction of the mark, or in a special format, also known as a stylized design format.
If you wish to register a mark with a design element or a stylized version of lettering, a special format drawing is appropriate. However, it's important to note that presenting your mark in a special format cannot evade a likelihood of confusion if a similar mark in standard characters is already registered. This is because the owner of a standard character mark has the right to use all variations of the mark, regardless of color, font style, or lettering size. Conversely, if a special form mark is registered, an applicant filing a similar mark in standard characters may face refusal based on a likelihood of confusion with the registered design mark.
- 66(a) Applications
- Abandoning a Trademark Application or Withdrawing a TTAB Proceeding
- Abandonment and Nonuse
- Abbreviations as Trademarks
- Accelerated Case Resolutions
- Acquired Secondary Trademark Meaning
- Amending Trademark Application
- Assigning a Trademark
- Assigning a Trademark and the Intent to Use Application
- Avoiding Fraud on Trademark Applications
- Avoiding Trademark Litigation
- Basis for Filing a Trademark
- Benefits of Registering a Trademark
- Bona Fide Intent to Use
- Celebrity Trademarks
- Challenging the Relatedness Factor
- Challenging Trademark Rights
- Claims in a Notice of Opposition
- Co-Existence Agreements
- Common Law Trademarks in the Internet Era
- Common Law Use and Priority
- Conflicting Marks
- Consent Agreements
- Constructive Use Priority
- Dates of Use
- Defenses in Opposition and Cancellation Proceedings
- Descriptive or Generic Trademarks
- Design Marks
- Design Trademarks
- Determining Trademark Similarities
- Discovery in TTAB Proceedings
- Dividing a Trademark Application
- Drawing Page
- Electronic Display Specimens for Trademarks
- Evidence in TTAB Proceedings
- Evidence of Acquired Distinctiveness
- Expediting Trademark Cancellation for Nonuse or Abandonment
- Extending Time to Oppose
- Factors of a Likelihood of Confusion Analysis
- False Suggestions of Connection
- Famous Trademarks and Likelihood of Confusion and Dilution
- Filing an Opposition or Cancellation Proceedings
- First Sale Doctrine
- Five Years of Use
- Foreign Trademark Rights
- Generic Trademarks
- Geographic Trademarks
- Hiring Trademark Counsel
- Immoral and Scandalous Trademarks
- Incontestability of U.S. Trademarks
- International Trademark Filings
- Joint Trademark Ownership
- Lawful Use of a Trademark in Commerce
- Likelihood of Confusion Analysis
- Likelihood of Confusion Refusal
- Merely Descriptive Trademarks
- Multiple Bases for a Trademark Application
- Overcoming and Ornamentation Trademark Refusal
- Personal Name Trademarks
- Principal and Supplemental Registers
- Protecting Single Creative Works
- Recording Trademark Assignments
- Refusal of a Trademark
- Refusing a Trade Dress Application
- Registering a Certification Trademark
- Registering a Service Mark
- Registering a Trademark That Lacks Inherent Distinctiveness
- Registering an International Trademark
- Relatedness of Goods or Services
- Request for Reconsideration in Trademark Office Action
- Requirements for International Trademark Application
- Revive an Abandoned Trademark Application
- Secondary Meaning
- Source Confusion
- Special Trademark Applications
- Standard Character and Special Format Marks
- Standing in Opposition and Cancellation Proceedings
- State Trademark Registration
- Statement of Use Extensions
- Tacking Doctrine
- Technical Trademark Use
- The Supplemental Register
- Trade Dress
- Trade Dress Application
- Trademark Application
- Trademark Clearance Searches
- Trademark Disclaimers
- Trademark Licensing
- Trademark of Authors, Performing Artists, and Characters
- Trademark Ownership
- Trademark Protection In Texas
- Trademark Settlements
- Trademark Specimens
- Trademark Specimens
- Trademark Use by Related Company
- Trademark Use in Advertising
- Trademark Use in Commerce
- Trademarking a Distinctive Mark
- Trademarking a Hashtag
- Trademarks for Musical Artists
- TTAB Discovery Rules
- TTAB Proceedings
- U.S. Service Mark
- U.S. Trade Dress
- Understanding Trade Channels
- Unitary U.S. Trademark
- Universal Symbols as Trademarks
- Using Secondary Sources
- What is an Ex Parte Appeal?
- Where to Register a Trademark
- Who Must File a Trademark?
Contact an Experienced Trademark Attorney
If you need legal advice regarding your trademark rights, assistance with trademark prosecution, or representation in a domain name dispute, contact Wilson Whitaker Rynell. Our team of trademark lawyers has extensive experience in all aspects of trademark and copyright law, including the filing of trademark applications and representing clients in defense or prosecution before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
CLIENT MATTERS
5,000+
YEARS OF SERVICE
25+
Award Winning
Recognized in the legal industry as dedicated board-certified lawyers and Rising Stars.
Expert Team
Your project will be handled by legal experts every time. You will have the most experienced attorneys working for you.
Quality Representation
