Rejection 2024-009157 (JP Appl. No. 2023-055529)

  – The applied mark consists of the words “KAJU-HI” and “” written in two tiers, with the upper tier “KAJU-HI” being easily recognized as the Alphabetical transliteration of the lower tier “”. Further, the wording “KAJU” is easily recognized as representing “fruit juice”, which means “the liquid obtained by squeezing fruit”, in relation to the designated goods of the application. Furthermore, the wording ‘HI’ is widely used as an abbreviation for “highball”, which means “a drink made by mixing whiskey or similar spirits with carbonated water and floating ice cubes”. Additionally, in the industry dealing with the designated goods of the trademark application, “highballs made with fruit juice” are in circulation, so the trademark as a whole is easily recognized as the meaning of “highball made with fruit juice”.

  Therefore, the Examiner refused the registration of the trademark application for “KAJU-HI＼” on the ground that the applied mark is merely a description of the raw materials or the quality of the goods “highball made with fruit juice” in a manner commonly used, and thus lacks distinctiveness.

  However, the trial Examiners for the appeal have judged that the Examiner’s judgement is incorrect.  That is, the trial Examiners for the appeal have judged that the applied mark has sufficient distinctiveness.

February 17, 2025

Tominaga Boeki Kaisha, Ltd.

(Applied Mark: JP Appl. No. 2023-055529)

  (The lower tier “” is a transliteration of the upper tier “KAJU-HI” in Japanese Katakana.)

  The applied mark, consisting of “KAJU-HI” in Alphabetical characters and “” in Japanese Katakana characters arranged in two tiers in a well-balanced manner, is not a pre-existing word recorded in Japanese dictionaries or other reference materials. Accordingly, the mark as a whole would be recognized and perceived as a coined word without any specific meaning.

　In the industry dealing with the designated goods of the applied mark, there is no evidence that the wording “KAJU-HI” or “” is generally used as indication directly describing the quality of goods.

  Furthermore, no facts were discovered indicating that traders or consumers dealing with the designated goods of the applied for mark would perceive the mark as a descriptive indication of product quality.

  Therefore, the applied mark is not likely to cause those dealing with the designated goods to understand the meaning of “Highballs made with fruit juice” as stated in the refusal decision. Rather, it is likely to be recognized and understood as a coined word without a specific meaning, and thus it is deemed to possess sufficient distinctiveness.

  In the industry dealing with the designated goods, there exist numerous registrations composed of the “XXX-HI” structure, such as “Imo-Hi”, “Mugi-Hi”, “Kome-Hi” and so on, which share a high degree of similarity to the applied mark in terms of composition. Considering such precedents, the applicant claimed in the appeal brief that the applied mark should also be deemed to merely suggest or indirectly indicate the product quality of the designated goods, rather than to directly describe the product quality of the designated goods. As a result of this claim in the appeal brief being successful, the Examiner’s judgement in the refusal decision was deemed incorrect, and the applicant’s request was granted by the trial Examiners for the appeal.