Jack Wolfskin Ausrustung Fur Draussen GmbH & Company KGAA v. New Millenium Sports, S.L.U.


Docket No. 2014-17890

LOURIE, BRYSON, CHEN
August 19, 2015

Brief Summary: TTAB decision affirmed-in-part, reversed-in-part, and remanded because NMS did not abandon its mark, the TTAB did not consider JWA’s mark as a whole, and failed to recognize “the relatively narrow scope of protection afforded to marks involving paw prints”.

Summary: Appellee NMS opposed JWA’s application to register a design mark consisting of an angled paw print for use with its clothing, footware, and accessory products, alleging it would cause confustion with its own mark (Reg. No. 1,856,808 (KELME mark)). JWA counterclaimed for cancellation of NMS’s mark, alleging that it had abandoned the mark. The TTAP rejected JWA’s claim, sustained the opposition, and refused to register JWA’s mark. The FC agreed with the Board that NMS did not abandon its mark but disagreed regarding a likelihood of confusion, finding it “failed to properly compare New Millenium’s mark as a whole to Jack Wolfskin’s mark and also failed to recognize, in light of the significant evidence of paw prints appearing in third party registrations and usage for clothing, the relatively narrow scope of protection afforded to marks involving paw prints.” The TTAB decision was therefore affirmed-in-part, reversed-in-part, and remanded.

This entry was posted in Trademarks. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s