PTO Form 1957 (Rev 9/2005) |
OMB No. 0651-0050 (Exp. 04/30/2011) |
Input Field |
Entered |
---|---|
SERIAL NUMBER | 85012912 |
LAW OFFICE ASSIGNED | LAW OFFICE 110 |
MARK SECTION (no change) | |
ARGUMENT(S) | |
AMENDMENT In response to the July 21, 2010 Office Action, please amend the above identified application as follows. Please delete the present identification of goods and services and insert the following therefor: International Class 8: Tattooing apparatus. International Class 16: Paper and cardboard; book binding material; photographs; stationery; adhesives for stationery or household purposes; artists' materials, namely, molds for modeling clays: paint brushes; typewriters; printed instructional and teaching material in the field of hairdressing, hair care, tattooing, hygiene and beauty care; printers' type; printing blocks.
International Class 44: Medical services related to the hair and scalp; hygienic and beauty care for human beings related to the hair scalp; cosmetic body care services related to the hair scalp; providing pigmentation-correction services, in the nature of laser therapy or the application of tattoos relating to the scalp; medical consultancy and advisory services relating to the hair and scalp; veterinary services; pet grooming, namely, hygienic and beauty care for animals; tattooing services; hair treatment services; consultancy and advisory services relating to veterinary services, hygienic and beauty care for animals; hair salon services, namely treatments to protect hair from effects of exposure to sunlight, heat, humidity and chlorinated water. RESPONSE I. RESPONSE TO SECTION 2(D) REFUSAL TO REGISTER In the July 21, 2010, Office Action, The Examining Attorney refused registration of Applicant's mark, MHT, on the Principal Register under Trademark Act § 2(d) on the grounds that the mark, when used in connection with the goods in the application as filed, is likely to be confused with the following previously registered trademarks: U.S. Trademark Registration No. 3017495, for MHT MEDICAL HIGH TECHNOLOGIES and Design, owned by MHT S.P.A. Joint Stock Company Italy, for "Electromedical apparatus and instruments, namely, spectrophotometers for the image diagnostic in the dermatological, vascular and endoscopic field" in International Class 10. U.S. Trademark Registration No. 2090449, for MHT MEDICAL HIGH TECHNOLOGIES and Design, owned by MHT S.P.A. Corporation Italy, for "laboratory equipment for dentists and dental technicians, namely, spectrophotometers" in International Class 10. The Examining Attorney argues that the similarities among the marks and services create a likelihood of confusion among consumers. Applicant respectfully requests that the Examining Attorney reconsider her refusal of registration in view of the amendment to the identification of goods and services and the information provided below. II. THERE IS NO LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION BETWEEN THE MARKS A. There Is No Confusion As To The Goods and Services In the July 21, 2010 Office Action, the Examining Attorney stated that Applicant's identification of goods and services was so broad that she must assume that they are related to those of the cited Registrant. The Examining Attorney determined that consumers are likely to conclude that the goods and services are somehow related or emanate from the same source. In view of the amendment to the identification of goods and services, Applicant respectfully asks the Examining Attorney to withdraw the refusal and submits the following arguments as stated below. At one time, the T.T.A.B. took the position that the use of identical or substantially identical marks on related items was likely to cause confusion in the trade as to source. This, however, is no longer true, and any per se rule has been abandoned in favor of a case-by-case analysis of the particular facts and circumstances, and an understanding that it is imperative to consider the realities of the marketplace. In re Quadram Corp., 228 U.S.P.Q. 863, 865 (T.T.A.B. 1985) (stating that "a per se rule relating to source confusion vis-à-vis computer hardware and software is simply too rigid and restrictive an approach and fails to consider the realities of the marketplace"); see also Natl. Rural Elec. Coop. Assoc. v. Suzlon Wind Entergy Corp., 78 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1881, 1886 (T.T.A.B. 2006) (no relationship between services in the field of rural electrification and wind turbine parts). In the present case, the particular goods upon which the cited marks are used are described as "electromedical apparatus and instruments, namely, spectrophotometers for the image diagnostic in the dermatological, vascular and endoscopic field" in International Class 10 and "laboratory equipment for dentists and dental technicians, namely, spectrophotometers" in International Class 10. According to its website, www.MHT.it, Registrant does advanced research "in the optics field, with the goal to develop new technologies to be applied in the electro-medical field." See Exhbit B. According the to the attached definition, the electro-medical field covers electrically operated diagnostic and other medical equipment. See Exhibit A. Specifically, Registrant designs and builds spectrophotometers for dental and dermatological uses. See Exhbit B. According to the attached definition, a spectrophotometer is "a device which measures the amount of ultraviolet light absorbed by a substance" and is a "key instrument today in biomedical laboratories." See Exhibit A. In contrast, Applicant's mark is intended for use in connection with goods and services related to a male hair loss tattoo solution. Specifically, Applicant provides goods and services related to cosmetic scalp pigmentation in classes 8, 16, 41, and 44. Applicant's scalp pigmentation technique is an "effective, permanent and hassle-free hair loss solution" that is "internationally recognized and … widely regarded as being the best in the world." See Exhibit C. Applicant provides bald or balding men with a highly detailed scalp tattoo, which imitates a closely cropped haircut. See Exhibit C. None of the goods identified in the cited registrations involve cosmetic scalp pigmentation services, tattoo apparatus, or medical services related to the scalp. Therefore, the Applicant's goods and services do not include goods that are the same or closely related to those covered by the cited registrations, as submitted by the Examining Attorney. Given the distinctions between the goods and services of the cited marks and the Applicant's mark, it is highly unlikely that the consumers would be confused between the cited Registrant and the Applicant as to the source of their respective goods and services. B. The Channels of Trade Are Significantly Different With respect to channels of trade, courts have made it clear that there is usually no likelihood of confusion where the goods sold or the services performed to the trade and to the customers, respectfully, do not ultimately reach the same market of the same purchasers. Windsor, Inc. v. Intravco Travel Centers, Inc., 25 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1111, 118 (S.D.N.Y. 1992).
In the present situation, Applicant's goods are primarily used by professionals at specialized hair loss clinics in a network of providers overseen by Applicant. Applicant's services are primarily sought out by men afflicted with hair loss. Registrant's goods, in contrast, are not used in hair loss clinics. Rather, they are used in biomedical and electro-medical research, dentistry practices, and dermatoligist practices. See Exhibit B. Consequently, the channels of trade through which the goods and services travel to the market are significantly different and separate, and it is highly unlikely that a consumer of the goods and services of the type described in the cited registrations and the present application would be confused. C. The Relevant Purchasers of the Goods Would Not Be Confused As indicated above, the goods and services upon which Applicant's mark are used and the goods described in the cited registrations are significantly different. The resulting relevant purchasers for each of the products are also substantially different. In Registrant's case, the relevant purchasers are sophisticated biomedical and electro-medical research labs and institutions (see Exhibit B), while the relevant purchasers of Applicant's services are the average male consumer experiencing hair loss (see Exhibit C). Case law demonstrates that where the relevant buyer class is composed of professional or commercial purchasers, it is reasonable to set a higher standard of care than it is for consumers, because it is assumed that such professional buyers are less likely to be confused than the ordinary customer. Oreck Corp. v. U.S. Floor Systems, Inc., 231 U.S.P.Q. 634 (5th Cir. 1986), reh'g denied, en banc, 808 F.2d 56 (5th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1069 (1987). The court in Oreck stated that "because these persons are buying for professional and institutional purposes… they are virtually certain to be informed, deliberate buyers… [T]his is not the sort of purchasing environment in which confusion flourishes." Id. at 640. In electronic Design & Sales, Inc. v. Electronic Data Systems Corp., 21 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1388 (Fed. Cir. 1992), the court focused on determining who is the relevant customer or purchaser. In the Electronic Design case, Electronic Design, the applicant, sold battery chargers and power supplies under the mark EDS to manufacturers of products, including manufacturers of medical instruments and devices. Electronic Data, the opposer, sold computer services under the EDS trademark in the medical, automotive, merchandising, communications, and other fields. Id. at 1389. The court in Electronic Design found that "[a]lthough the two parties conduct business not only in the same fields, but also with the same companies, the mere purchase of the goods and services of both parties by the same institution does not, by itself, establish similarity of trade channels or overlap of customers. The likelihood of confusion must be shown to exist not in the purchasing institution, but in a customer or purchaser." The court in Electronic Design went on to say "Even assuming, arguendo, that the Board was correct in finding sufficient relatedness of the goods and services, the relevant persons -- potential or actual purchasers-- are nevertheless mostly different, and in any event are sophisticated enough that the likelihood of confusion remains remote. Id. at 1391-1392. The reasoning in the Oreck and Electronic Design cases applies equally well in Applicant's situation. The relevant buyer class of the Registrant's goods are biomedical and electro-medical research professionals, dentists, and dermatologists. Spectrophotometers are highly advanced and expensive lab equipment. These buyers are virtually certain to be highly informed and deliberate buyers in accordance with Oreck. In contrast, the relevant buyer class of Applicant's services is composed of the average male consumer. Cosmetic scalp pigmentation is a serious procedure which, if performed incorrectly, can have serious consequences. See Exhibit C. Applicant's services are high cost and high value. Likewise, these individuals are virtually certain to be discerning and deliberate in their purchasing decisions for such services, in accordance with Oreck. As in Electronic Design, the present situation presents minimal overlap in the likely class of the actual consumers or purchasers. However, even assuming an overlap, the class of relevant consumers or purchasers consists of highly sophisticated and deliberate purchasers, and thus the likelihood of confusion remains remote. III. PRIOR PENDING APPLICATIONS In the July 21, 2010 Office Action, the Examining Attorney enclosed information regarding three pending applications with filing dates that precede Applicant's filing date. The three pending applications are as follows:
There is no danger of likelihood of confusion in view of Applicant's amendment to the identification of goods and services and the information provided above. While Applicant acknowledges that the application for MHT PARTNERS has matured to registration, the significant differences between the goods and services specified in the above applications and Applicant's goods and services limits any potential confusion. Consumers are highly unlikely to confuse investment services or clothing apparel with cosmetic scalp pigmentation services and related goods. However, Applicant respectfully reserves the right to present further arguments on these cited applications should they mature to registration. IV. DUAL BASIS Applicant intends to rely on Section 44(e), in addition to Section 1(b), as a basis for registration. Applicant has attached a copy to its foreign registration certificate to perfect the Section 44(e) basis for registration for Classes 8, 16, 41 and 44. V. CONCLUSION Applicant respectfully requests that the Examining Attorney reconsider and withdraw the refusal to register in view of the foregoing information and Applicant's amendments to the application. If the Examining Attorney has any questions, she is invited to contact the undersigned Applicant's attorney directly. |
|
EVIDENCE SECTION | |
EVIDENCE FILE NAME(S) | |
ORIGINAL PDF FILE | evi_2166414140-143913108_._Ex_A_Response_20110121.pdf |
CONVERTED PDF FILE(S) (4 pages) |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0002.JPG |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0003.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0004.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0005.JPG | |
ORIGINAL PDF FILE | evi_2166414140-143913108_._Ex_B_Response_20110121.pdf |
CONVERTED PDF FILE(S) (9 pages) |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0006.JPG |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0007.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0008.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0009.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0010.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0011.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0012.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0013.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0014.JPG | |
ORIGINAL PDF FILE | evi_2166414140-143913108_._Ex_C_Response_20110121.pdf |
CONVERTED PDF FILE(S) (16 pages) |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0015.JPG |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0016.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0017.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0018.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0019.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0020.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0021.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0022.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0023.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0024.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0025.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0026.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0027.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0028.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0029.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0030.JPG | |
DESCRIPTION OF EVIDENCE FILE | Exhibits A - C in support of Applicant's argument |
GOODS AND/OR SERVICES SECTION (008)(current) | |
INTERNATIONAL CLASS | 008 |
DESCRIPTION | Tattooing apparatus and instruments |
FILING BASIS | Section 1(b) |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(d) |
FOREIGN APPLICATION NUMBER | 8611618 |
FOREIGN APPLICATION COUNTRY | European Community |
FOREIGN FILING DATE | 10/13/2009 |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(e) |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION COUNTRY |
European Community |
GOODS AND/OR SERVICES SECTION (008)(proposed) | |
INTERNATIONAL CLASS | 008 |
TRACKED TEXT DESCRIPTION | |
FINAL DESCRIPTION | Tattooing apparatus. |
FILING BASIS | Section 1(b) |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(d) |
FOREIGN APPLICATION NUMBER | 8611618 |
FOREIGN APPLICATION COUNTRY | European Community |
FOREIGN FILING DATE | 10/13/2009 |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(e) |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION NUMBER | 8611618 |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION COUNTRY |
European Community |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION DATE |
05/27/2010 |
FOREIGN EXPIRATION DATE | 10/13/2019 |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION FILE NAME(S) | |
ORIGINAL PDF FILE | FRU0-2166414140-143913108_._41231_Certificate_of_Registration.pdf |
CONVERTED PDF FILE(S) (6 pages) |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0031.JPG |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0032.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0033.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0034.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0035.JPG | |
\\TICRS\EXPORT11\IMAGEOUT11\850\129\85012912\xml3\ROA0036.JPG | |
STANDARD CHARACTERS OR EQUIVALENT |
YES |
GOODS AND/OR SERVICES SECTION (016)(current) | |
INTERNATIONAL CLASS | 016 |
DESCRIPTION | |
Paper, cardboard and goods made from these materials, not included in other classes; printed matter; book binding material; photographs; stationery; adhesives for stationery or household purposes; artists' materials; paint brushes; typewriters and office requisites (except furniture); instructional and teaching material (except apparatus); plastic materials for packaging (not included in other classes); printers' type; printing blocks | |
FILING BASIS | Section 1(b) |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(d) |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(e) |
GOODS AND/OR SERVICES SECTION (016)(proposed) | |
INTERNATIONAL CLASS | 016 |
TRACKED TEXT DESCRIPTION | |
FINAL DESCRIPTION | |
Paper and cardboard; book binding material; photographs; stationery; adhesives for stationery or household purposes; artists' materials, namely, molds for modeling clays: paint brushes; typewriters; printed instructional and teaching material in the field of hairdressing, hair care, tattooing, hygiene and beauty care; printers' type; printing blocks | |
FILING BASIS | Section 1(b) |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(d) |
FOREIGN APPLICATION NUMBER | 8611618 |
FOREIGN APPLICATION COUNTRY | European Community |
FOREIGN FILING DATE | 10/13/2009 |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(e) |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION NUMBER | 8611618 |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION COUNTRY |
European Community |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION DATE |
05/27/2010 |
FOREIGN EXPIRATION DATE | 10/13/2019 |
STANDARD CHARACTERS OR EQUIVALENT |
YES |
GOODS AND/OR SERVICES SECTION (041)(current) | |
INTERNATIONAL CLASS | 041 |
DESCRIPTION | |
Education; providing of training; entertainment; sporting and cultural activities; medical training services; training services relating to tattooing and cosmetic treatment and pigmentation services; consultation and advisory services relating to the aforesaid services | |
FILING BASIS | Section 1(b) |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(d) |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(e) |
GOODS AND/OR SERVICES SECTION (041)(proposed) | |
INTERNATIONAL CLASS | 041 |
TRACKED TEXT DESCRIPTION | |
FINAL DESCRIPTION | |
Education namely, in the field of hair care, hair dressing, tattooing, hygiene and beauty care; providing of training in the field of hair care, hair dressing, tattooing, hygiene and beauty care; organizing community sporting and cultural activities; medical training services; training services related to tattooing and cosmetic treatment and pigmentation services; consultation and advisory services relating to the aforesaid services | |
FILING BASIS | Section 1(b) |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(d) |
FOREIGN APPLICATION NUMBER | 8611618 |
FOREIGN APPLICATION COUNTRY | European Community |
FOREIGN FILING DATE | 10/13/2009 |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(e) |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION NUMBER | 8611618 |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION COUNTRY |
European Community |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION DATE |
05/27/2010 |
FOREIGN EXPIRATION DATE | 10/13/2019 |
STANDARD CHARACTERS OR EQUIVALENT |
YES |
GOODS AND/OR SERVICES SECTION (044)(current) | |
INTERNATIONAL CLASS | 044 |
DESCRIPTION | |
Medical services; hygienic and beauty care for human beings; cosmetic treatment services; cosmetic pigmentation services; consultancy and advisory services; all the aforesaid services relating to the scalp; veterinary services; hygienic and beauty care for animals; tattooing services; hair treatment services; consultancy and advisory services relating to veterinary services, hygienic and beauty care for animals, tattooing services and to hair treatment services | |
FILING BASIS | Section 1(b) |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(d) |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(e) |
GOODS AND/OR SERVICES SECTION (044)(proposed) | |
INTERNATIONAL CLASS | 044 |
TRACKED TEXT DESCRIPTION | |
FINAL DESCRIPTION | |
Medical services related to the hair and scalp; hygienic and beauty care for human beings related to the hair scalp; cosmetic body care services related to the hair scalp; providing pigmentation-correction services, in the nature of laser therapy or the application of tattoos relating to the scalp; medical consultancy and advisory services relating to the hair and scalp; veterinary services; pet grooming, namely, hygienic and beauty care for animals; tattooing services; hair treatment services; consultancy and advisory services relating to veterinary services, hygienic and beauty care for animals; hair salon services, namely treatments to protect hair from effects of exposure to sunlight, heat, humidity and chlorinated water | |
FILING BASIS | Section 1(b) |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(d) |
FOREIGN APPLICATION NUMBER | 8611618 |
FOREIGN APPLICATION COUNTRY | European Community |
FOREIGN FILING DATE | 10/13/2009 |
FILING BASIS | Section 44(e) |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION NUMBER | 8611618 |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION COUNTRY |
European Community |
FOREIGN REGISTRATION DATE |
05/27/2010 |
FOREIGN EXPIRATION DATE | 10/13/2019 |
STANDARD CHARACTERS OR EQUIVALENT |
YES |
SIGNATURE SECTION | |
RESPONSE SIGNATURE | /Everett E. Fruehling/ |
SIGNATORY'S NAME | Everett E. Fruehling |
SIGNATORY'S POSITION | Attorney of Record, Washington State Bar Member |
DATE SIGNED | 01/21/2011 |
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY | YES |
FILING INFORMATION SECTION | |
SUBMIT DATE | Fri Jan 21 15:19:04 EST 2011 |
TEAS STAMP | USPTO/ROA-XXX.XX.XXX.XX-2 0110121151904128437-85012 912-470bae638a832899dd6ab 5324b2d4d653cf-N/A-N/A-20 110121143913108057 |
PTO Form 1957 (Rev 9/2005) |
OMB No. 0651-0050 (Exp. 04/30/2011) |
AMENDMENT
In response to the July 21, 2010 Office Action, please amend the above identified application as follows.
Please delete the present identification of goods and services and insert the following therefor:
International Class 8: Tattooing apparatus.
International Class 16: Paper and cardboard; book binding material; photographs; stationery; adhesives for stationery or household purposes; artists' materials, namely, molds for modeling clays: paint brushes; typewriters; printed instructional and teaching material in the field of hairdressing, hair care, tattooing, hygiene and beauty care; printers' type; printing blocks.
International Class 41: Education namely, in the field of hair care, hair dressing, tattooing, hygiene and beauty care; providing of training in
the field of hair care, hair dressing, tattooing, hygiene and beauty care; organizing community sporting and cultural activities; medical training services; training services related to tattooing and
cosmetic treatment and pigmentation services; consultation and advisory services relating to the aforesaid services.
International Class 44: Medical services related to the hair and scalp; hygienic and beauty care for human beings related to the hair scalp; cosmetic body care services related to the hair scalp; providing pigmentation-correction services, in the nature of laser therapy or the application of tattoos relating to the scalp; medical consultancy and advisory services relating to the hair and scalp; veterinary services; pet grooming, namely, hygienic and beauty care for animals; tattooing services; hair treatment services; consultancy and advisory services relating to veterinary services, hygienic and beauty care for animals; hair salon services, namely treatments to protect hair from effects of exposure to sunlight, heat, humidity and chlorinated water.
RESPONSE
I. RESPONSE TO SECTION 2(D) REFUSAL TO REGISTER
In the July 21, 2010, Office Action, The Examining Attorney refused registration of Applicant's mark, MHT, on the Principal Register under Trademark Act § 2(d) on the grounds that the mark, when used in connection with the goods in the application as filed, is likely to be confused with the following previously registered trademarks:
U.S. Trademark Registration No. 3017495, for MHT MEDICAL HIGH TECHNOLOGIES and Design, owned by MHT S.P.A. Joint Stock Company Italy, for "Electromedical apparatus and instruments, namely, spectrophotometers for the image diagnostic in the dermatological, vascular and endoscopic field" in International Class 10.
U.S. Trademark Registration No. 2090449, for MHT MEDICAL HIGH TECHNOLOGIES and Design, owned by MHT S.P.A. Corporation Italy, for "laboratory equipment for dentists and dental technicians, namely, spectrophotometers" in International Class 10.
The Examining Attorney argues that the similarities among the marks and services create a likelihood of confusion among consumers. Applicant respectfully requests that the Examining Attorney reconsider her refusal of registration in view of the amendment to the identification of goods and services and the information provided below.
II. THERE IS NO LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION BETWEEN THE MARKS
A. There Is No Confusion As To The Goods and Services
In the July 21, 2010 Office Action, the Examining Attorney stated that Applicant's identification of goods and services was so broad that she must assume that they are related to those of the cited Registrant. The Examining Attorney determined that consumers are likely to conclude that the goods and services are somehow related or emanate from the same source. In view of the amendment to the identification of goods and services, Applicant respectfully asks the Examining Attorney to withdraw the refusal and submits the following arguments as stated below.
At one time, the T.T.A.B. took the position that the use of identical or substantially identical marks on related items was likely to cause confusion in the trade as to source. This, however, is no longer true, and any per se rule has been abandoned in favor of a case-by-case analysis of the particular facts and circumstances, and an understanding that it is imperative to consider the realities of the marketplace. In re Quadram Corp., 228 U.S.P.Q. 863, 865 (T.T.A.B. 1985) (stating that "a per se rule relating to source confusion vis-à-vis computer hardware and software is simply too rigid and restrictive an approach and fails to consider the realities of the marketplace"); see also Natl. Rural Elec. Coop. Assoc. v. Suzlon Wind Entergy Corp., 78 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1881, 1886 (T.T.A.B. 2006) (no relationship between services in the field of rural electrification and wind turbine parts).
In the present case, the particular goods upon which the cited marks are used are described as "electromedical apparatus and instruments, namely, spectrophotometers for the image diagnostic in the dermatological, vascular and endoscopic field" in International Class 10 and "laboratory equipment for dentists and dental technicians, namely, spectrophotometers" in International Class 10. According to its website, www.MHT.it, Registrant does advanced research "in the optics field, with the goal to develop new technologies to be applied in the electro-medical field." See Exhbit B. According the to the attached definition, the electro-medical field covers electrically operated diagnostic and other medical equipment. See Exhibit A. Specifically, Registrant designs and builds spectrophotometers for dental and dermatological uses. See Exhbit B. According to the attached definition, a spectrophotometer is "a device which measures the amount of ultraviolet light absorbed by a substance" and is a "key instrument today in biomedical laboratories." See Exhibit A.
In contrast, Applicant's mark is intended for use in connection with goods and services related to a male hair loss tattoo solution. Specifically, Applicant provides goods and services related to cosmetic scalp pigmentation in classes 8, 16, 41, and 44. Applicant's scalp pigmentation technique is an "effective, permanent and hassle-free hair loss solution" that is "internationally recognized and … widely regarded as being the best in the world." See Exhibit C. Applicant provides bald or balding men with a highly detailed scalp tattoo, which imitates a closely cropped haircut. See Exhibit C.
None of the goods identified in the cited registrations involve cosmetic scalp pigmentation services, tattoo apparatus, or medical services related to the scalp. Therefore, the Applicant's goods and services do not include goods that are the same or closely related to those covered by the cited registrations, as submitted by the Examining Attorney. Given the distinctions between the goods and services of the cited marks and the Applicant's mark, it is highly unlikely that the consumers would be confused between the cited Registrant and the Applicant as to the source of their respective goods and services.
B. The Channels of Trade Are Significantly Different
With respect to channels of trade, courts have made it clear that there is usually no likelihood of confusion where the goods sold or the services performed to the trade and to the customers, respectfully, do not ultimately reach the same market of the same purchasers. Windsor, Inc. v. Intravco Travel Centers, Inc., 25 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1111, 118 (S.D.N.Y. 1992).
In the present situation, Applicant's goods are primarily used by professionals at specialized hair loss clinics in a network of providers overseen by Applicant. Applicant's services are primarily sought out by men afflicted with hair loss. Registrant's goods, in contrast, are not used in hair loss clinics. Rather, they are used in biomedical and electro-medical research, dentistry practices, and dermatoligist practices. See Exhibit B. Consequently, the channels of trade through which the goods and services travel to the market are significantly different and separate, and it is highly unlikely that a consumer of the goods and services of the type described in the cited registrations and the present application would be confused.
C. The Relevant Purchasers of the Goods Would Not Be Confused
As indicated above, the goods and services upon which Applicant's mark are used and the goods described in the cited registrations are significantly different. The resulting relevant purchasers for each of the products are also substantially different. In Registrant's case, the relevant purchasers are sophisticated biomedical and electro-medical research labs and institutions (see Exhibit B), while the relevant purchasers of Applicant's services are the average male consumer experiencing hair loss (see Exhibit C).
Case law demonstrates that where the relevant buyer class is composed of professional or commercial purchasers, it is reasonable to set a higher standard of care than it is for consumers, because it is assumed that such professional buyers are less likely to be confused than the ordinary customer. Oreck Corp. v. U.S. Floor Systems, Inc., 231 U.S.P.Q. 634 (5th Cir. 1986), reh'g denied, en banc, 808 F.2d 56 (5th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1069 (1987). The court in Oreck stated that "because these persons are buying for professional and institutional purposes… they are virtually certain to be informed, deliberate buyers… [T]his is not the sort of purchasing environment in which confusion flourishes." Id. at 640. In electronic Design & Sales, Inc. v. Electronic Data Systems Corp., 21 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1388 (Fed. Cir. 1992), the court focused on determining who is the relevant customer or purchaser. In the Electronic Design case, Electronic Design, the applicant, sold battery chargers and power supplies under the mark EDS to manufacturers of products, including manufacturers of medical instruments and devices. Electronic Data, the opposer, sold computer services under the EDS trademark in the medical, automotive, merchandising, communications, and other fields. Id. at 1389. The court in Electronic Design found that "[a]lthough the two parties conduct business not only in the same fields, but also with the same companies, the mere purchase of the goods and services of both parties by the same institution does not, by itself, establish similarity of trade channels or overlap of customers. The likelihood of confusion must be shown to exist not in the purchasing institution, but in a customer or purchaser." The court in Electronic Design went on to say "Even assuming, arguendo, that the Board was correct in finding sufficient relatedness of the goods and services, the relevant persons -- potential or actual purchasers-- are nevertheless mostly different, and in any event are sophisticated enough that the likelihood of confusion remains remote. Id. at 1391-1392.
The reasoning in the Oreck and Electronic Design cases applies equally well in Applicant's situation. The relevant buyer class of the Registrant's goods are biomedical and electro-medical research professionals, dentists, and dermatologists. Spectrophotometers are highly advanced and expensive lab equipment. These buyers are virtually certain to be highly informed and deliberate buyers in accordance with Oreck. In contrast, the relevant buyer class of Applicant's services is composed of the average male consumer. Cosmetic scalp pigmentation is a serious procedure which, if performed incorrectly, can have serious consequences. See Exhibit C. Applicant's services are high cost and high value. Likewise, these individuals are virtually certain to be discerning and deliberate in their purchasing decisions for such services, in accordance with Oreck. As in Electronic Design, the present situation presents minimal overlap in the likely class of the actual consumers or purchasers. However, even assuming an overlap, the class of relevant consumers or purchasers consists of highly sophisticated and deliberate purchasers, and thus the likelihood of confusion remains remote.
III. PRIOR PENDING APPLICATIONS
In the July 21, 2010 Office Action, the Examining Attorney enclosed information regarding three pending applications with filing dates that precede Applicant's filing date. The three pending applications are as follows:
There is no danger of likelihood of confusion in view of Applicant's amendment to the identification of goods and services and the information provided above. While Applicant acknowledges that the application for MHT PARTNERS has matured to registration, the significant differences between the goods and services specified in the above applications and Applicant's goods and services limits any potential confusion. Consumers are highly unlikely to confuse investment services or clothing apparel with cosmetic scalp pigmentation services and related goods. However, Applicant respectfully reserves the right to present further arguments on these cited applications should they mature to registration.
IV. DUAL BASIS
Applicant intends to rely on Section 44(e), in addition to Section 1(b), as a basis for registration. Applicant has attached a copy to its foreign registration certificate to perfect the Section 44(e) basis for registration for Classes 8, 16, 41 and 44.
V. CONCLUSION
Applicant respectfully requests that the Examining Attorney reconsider and withdraw the refusal to register in view of the foregoing information and Applicant's amendments to the application. If the Examining Attorney has any questions, she is invited to contact the undersigned Applicant's attorney directly.