IPO The opposition was based on various CHEROKEE marks registered in respect of goods which were similar. The Hearing Officer also found ‘a good deal of visual similarity between the respective marks’. Nevertheless, in his consideration of a likelihood of confusion the Hearing Officer concluded that the average consumer would ‘have conceptual hooks in relation to the earlier trade mark upon which the memory (could) hang’. Hence there was no likelihood of confusion. This finding in respect of the marks effectively finished off the Section 5(3) objection also.
Citations:
[2007] UKIntelP o25107
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Intellectual Property
Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.456747
