BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> CHICKEN POPS (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2004] UKIntelP o05804 (3 March 2004) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2004/o05804.html Cite as: [2004] UKIntelP o5804, [2004] UKIntelP o05804 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o05804
Result
Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed.
Points Of Interest
Summary
The opponent’s opposition was essentially based on a prior Community Trade Mark application for the mark "Chicken-popcorn" for the same and similar goods as those of the applicant. The opponent had no use of this mark in the UK.
The applicant claimed the respective marks were not confusingly similar. They also pointed to the existence of two other marks on the UK register POPCORN CHICKEN and PIC-'N'-POPPIN CHICKEN which they indicated would be barriers to the registration of the opponent's mark.
Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer noted that in this case he had only to compare the respective marks CHICKEN POPS and "chicken-popcorn" and the state of the Register did not affect that comparison. As the respective goods consist of or contain chicken the presence of the word 'chicken' in the respective marks did not add much to their overall distinctiveness. In comparing the words POPS and 'popcorn' the Hearing Officer concluded that they were different phonetically, visually and conceptually. Overall, therefore, he considered that the respective marks were not confusingly similar. Opposition thus failed.
