Appeal decision report (PRINCE HOTEL) | ONDA TECHNO Intl. Patent Attys.[Japan Patent Firm] | Gifu City

Appeal decision report (PRINCE HOTEL) | ONDA TECHNO Intl. Patent Attys.[Japan Patent Firm] | Gifu City

Access

News & Reports

Appeal decision report (PRINCE HOTEL)

January 11, 2022
Tatsuya Kimura

Appeal number Invalidation 2020-890029(JP. Reg. No. 5750467)
Case summary There is no likelihood of confusion between two marks even though both have a cursive-style logo with the Latin letter “P” as a motif because there is a remarkable difference in the degree of inclination of the logo and in the bottom of the logo which is shaped like “∞.”
Date of decision December 2, 2020
Demandant (Applicant) Prince Hotels Inc.
Trademark(s)

Subject trademark

Cited mark No. 1

Cited mark No. 2

Designated Goods and Class(es))

Tea, prepared coffee and prepared cocoa, confectionery, bread and buns, shaved ice confections in class 30.
Providing foods and beverages in class 43.

Judgement

Similarity between marks and the likelihood of confusion

(1) Trademark in Question

The Trademark is a cursive-style logo with the Latin letter “P” as a motif, with the “P Logo” tilted to the right, the letters “Precious” on the right, and a smaller “Mon Favori” below it. The letters “Sweets” are arranged respectively. The “P logo” can be viewed separately from the Latin characters of “Precious” and “Mon Favori Sweets” on the right side.

(2) Cited Trademarks

Cited Trademark 1 consists of an upright cursive-style Latin letter “P” as a motif, and a “P logo” in which the lower sides of the vertical bar is folded to draw “∞.”
Cited Trademark 2 has the Latin characters “Prince Hotel” at the bottom of the “P logo”, and it is reasonable to judge that the “P logo” part may contribute to the transaction.

(3) Similarity between the Trademark and the Cited Trademarks

The “P Logo” is the dominant part of the Trademark and the  Cited Trademarks. Although both logos have the Latin letter “P” as a motif, the degree of inclination of the logo is significantly different, and the lower side connected from the vertical bar is folded to draw “∞.” There is a remarkable difference in whether it is a ribbon-like final stroke in the form of “∞,” so even if you observe it separately, they should be distinguishable from each other.
In conclusion, the Trademark and the Cited Trademarks are dissimilar and are not confusable with each other.

Comments

At first glance, the P logo parts of the Trademark and the Cited Trademarks appear to be similar. However, a cursive-style logo is common as a script typeface of Latin characters, and in the end, the distinctive feature of the P logos of the Cited Trademarks is that the vertical bar is folded to draw “∞.” Accordingly, it is judged that there is no risk of being confused with the Trademark that does not have the feature.