In a recent decision, the Trademarks Opposition Board (“TMOB”) refused a trademark application for DOGKIND, finding it was confusingly similar to the already registered trademark, PETKIND.
Dogkind Services Inc. sought to register the DOGKIND mark for: (i) animal training, (ii) boarding for animals, and (iii) dog walking services.
PetKind Pet Products Inc. opposed registration, claiming it would likely cause confusion with its PETKIND trademark, which covers pet products, including dog food, and services related to pet ownership, such as workshops and counselling.
TMOB’s decision hinged on an analysis of the factors outlined in Subsection 6(5) of the Trademarks Act, which assesses the likelihood of confusion between trademarks by considering, among other things:
- the inherent distinctiveness of the trademarks and the extent to which they have become known;
- the length of time the trademarks have been in use;
- the nature of the goods and services or business;
- the nature of the trade; and
- the degree of resemblance between the trademarks, including in appearance or sound or the ideas suggested by them.
Although TMOB considered the case to be "at best, borderline," it emphasized that the "legal onus is on the Applicant". TMOB further noted that, given the “similarity between the trademarks,” as well as the “relatedness of the goods, services, and their channels of trade,” it was not persuaded that, on a balance of probabilities, there is not a reasonable likelihood of confusion.
Authors
Expertise
Insights
-
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Pecking Order Problem: Pudgy Penguins Faces Penguin Trademark Lawsuit
As reported by Bloomberg Law News, PEI Licensing (“PEI”), the owner of the Penguin apparel brand, has sued Pudgy Penguins NFT (“Pudgy Penguins”) for trademark infringement.Pudgy Penguins started as a… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Old Brand, New Problems? Nike’s Attempt to Revive “Total 90” Soccer Cleats
Nike is reportedly attempting to revive its classic “Total 90” soccer cleat line, but has encountered an unexpected setback. Total90, LLC has reportedly asserted that Nike is infringing its… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Swing and a Miss: The “All Rise” Trademark Attempt
As reported by Bloomberg, attempts to register marks covering the phrases “All Rise” and “Here Comes the Judge” were rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Hershey’s Kisses Go to Court – Federal Court of Appeal Decision in PIM Brands Inc. v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC
The Federal Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Promotion in Motion, Inc. (PIM Brands, Inc.) v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC offers fresh guidance on how courts evaluate survey evidence… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
CIPO Explores Fast-Tracking Patents for Innovation in Priority Sectors
Industry Minister Mélanie Joly is reportedly evaluating a proposal from the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (“CIPO”) that would accelerate patent applications in artificial intelligence… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Rock History and Copyright: The Show Goes On
Veteran rock photographer, Neil Zlozower, reportedly sued the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame for allegedly using his copyrighted images of Eddie Van Halen in its museum exhibits without his permission…