The opponent submitted that the mark applied for contained descriptive words and that the device element was mere embellishment. Thus the mark in suit should be refused registration.
The Hearing Officer accepted that the words in the mark BRAND PROTECT had descriptive connotations in the light of, and user of the words BRAND PROTECTION, but he noted that the device of an elephant was distinctive for the services at issue and that it is a prominent element in the mark in suit. Overall the Hearing Officer concluded that the mark applied for has distinctive character and therefore acceptable for registration. Opposition failed.
[2006] UKIntelP o36206
Bailii
England and Wales
Updated: 19 October 2021; Ref: scu.454928 br>