UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) SERIAL NO: 76/349852
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) APPLICANT:(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC
`CORPORATION OF AMERI ETC.
`
`*76349852*
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS:
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) MORTON AMSTER
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) AMSTER ROTHSTEIN
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) 90 PARK AVE FL 21
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) NEW YORK NY 10016-1301
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`E-WEAR
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`EXAMINING ATTORNEY'S APPEAL BRIEF
`
`BEFORE THE
`TRADEMARK TRIAL
`AND APPEAL BOARD
`ON APPEAL
`
`Please provide in all correspondence:
`
`(cid:160)1
`
`.(cid:160) Filing date, serial number, mark and
`applicant's name.
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`2.(cid:160) Date of this Office Action.
`3.(cid:160) Examining Attorney's name and
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) Law Office number.
`4. Your
`telephone number and e-mail
`address.
`
`(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) MARK:(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO :(cid:160)(cid:160) 55210/424
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) CORRESPONDENT EMAIL ADDRESS:(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`

`
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ON APPEAL
`
`Applicant:
`
`Trademark:
`
`Matsushita Electric Corporation
`of America
`E-WEAR
`
`Serial No:
`
`76349852
`
`Attorney:
`
`Holly Pekowsky
`
`Address:
`
`Amster, Rothstein and Ebenstein
`LLP
`90 Park Avenue
`New York, NY 10016
`
`(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`BEFORE THE(cid:160)
`
`TRADEMARK TRIAL
`
`AND
`
`APPEAL BOARD
`
`ON APPEAL
`
`EXAMINING ATTORNEY’S APPEAL BRIEF
`
`STATEMENT OF THE CASE
`
`Applicant has appealed the Trademark Examining Attorney’s final refusal to register the trademark E-
`
`WEAR for “wearable portable audio/video products, namely, digital camcorders, digital still cameras,
`
`digital audio players and digital voice recorder; liquid crystal display viewers for the viewing of videos,
`
`namely, video monitors and dot-matrix sd-enabled printers for printing digitally recorded video images,
`
`none of the above products to be featured in or as part of a cellular telephone or cellular telephone
`accessory,” [1] in Class 9 on the ground of likelihood of confusion, mistake or deception under Trademark
`
`Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. Section 1052(d), with the mark in Reg. No. 2293127, ELECTRONIC WEAR,
`
`for “electronic cordless telephone accessories, namely, antennas, backup batteries, phone batteries, battery
`
`eliminators, electrical cables, carrying cases and protectors, cellular phones, electrical cigarette lighter
`
`socket adapters, electrical cellular connectors, electrical coaxial connectors, digital display units,
`
`telephone headsets, telephone microphones, power supplies, voice storage circuits, electrical cellular wire
`
`connectors and telephone mounts,” in Class 9.
`
`FACTS
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`

`
`Applicant filed this application on December 17, 2001, applying to register on the Principal Register the
`
`mark E-WEAR for “wearable portable audio/video recorders including a digital camcorder, digital still
`
`camera, digital audio player and digital voice recorder; LCD viewers for the viewing of video; and
`
`printers for printing digitally recorded video images.” (cid:160) In the First Office Action dated April 12, 2002,
`
`registration was refused (1) under Section 2(e)(1) on the ground that the mark merely describes the goods
`
`identified in the application, (2) under Section 2(e)(1) on the ground that
`
`the mark deceptively
`
`misdescribes the goods identified in the application, (3) under Section 2(d) on the ground that the mark,
`
`when used in connection with the identified goods, so resembles the mark in Reg. No. 1845160 as to be
`
`likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive, (4) under Section 2(d) on the ground that the
`
`mark, when used in connection with the identified goods, so resembles the mark in Reg. No. 2532621 as
`
`to be likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive.(cid:160) The applicant was also required to clarify
`
`the identification of goods and to submit information concerning the goods.(cid:160) The applicant was also
`
`advised of the potential refusal under Section 2(d) with regard to prior-filed Application Serial Nos.
`
`76024141, 75742114, 75755972, 75772783 and 76309290.
`
`(cid:160) O
`
`n October 10, 2003, the applicant (1) argued against the refusal to register the mark under Section
`
`2(e)(1) as being merely descriptive, (2) argued against the refusal to register the mark under Section
`
`2(e)(1) as being deceptively misdescriptive of the goods, (3) argued against the refusal to register the mark
`
`under Section 2(d) likelihood of confusion with regard to Reg. Nos. 1845160 and 2532621, (4) proposed
`
`an amended identification of goods, and (5) submitted information concerning the goods.
`
`(cid:160) O
`
`n November 6, 2002, the information concerning the goods was accepted, the potential refusals under
`
`Section 2(d) with regard to Application Serial Nos. 76024141 and 75755972 were withdrawn, the refusals
`
`to register the mark under Section 2(e)(1) as merely descriptive and alternatively as deceptively
`
`misdescriptive were maintained and continued, the refusals to register under Section 2(d) with regard to
`
`Reg. Nos. 1845160 and 2532621 were maintained and continued, the potential refusals under Section 2(d)
`
`with regard to prior-filed Application Serial Nos. 75742114, 75772783 and 76309290 were maintained
`
`and continued, and further action on the application was suspended pending disposition of prior-filed
`
`Application Serial Nos. 75742114, 75772783 and 76309290.
`
`

`
`(cid:160) O
`
`n March 31, 2003, applicant amended the identification of goods, argued against the refusal to register
`
`the mark under Section 2(e)(1) as merely descriptive of the goods, and argued against the refusal under
`
`Section 2(e)(1) as deceptively misdescriptive of the goods.
`
`(cid:160) O
`
`n June 10, 2003, the amended identification was accepted, the refusal to register the mark under Section
`
`2(e)(1) as deceptively misdescriptive was withdrawn, the refusal to register the mark under Section 2(d)
`
`with regard to Reg. Nos. 1845160 and 2532621 were withdrawn, the potential refusal under Section 2(d)
`
`with regard to prior-filed Application Serial Nos. 75742114, 75772783 and 76309290 were withdrawn, the
`
`refusal to register the mark under Section 2(e)(1) as merely descriptive was maintained and continued, and
`
`a new issue was raised with the mark being refused under Section 2(d) with regard to Reg. No. 2293127.
`
`(cid:160) O
`
`n December 4, 2003, the applicant argued against the refusal to register the mark under Section 2(e)(1)
`
`as merely descriptive, and argued against the refusal to register the mark under Section 2(d) with regard to
`
`Reg. No. 2293127.
`
`(cid:160) O
`
`n February 5, 2004, the refusal to register the mark under Section 2(e)(1) as merely descriptive was
`
`withdrawn, and the refusal to register the mark under Section 2(d) with regard to Reg. No. 2293127 was
`
`maintained and made final.
`
`(cid:160) O
`
`n August 4, 2004, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration of the refusal to register the mark
`
`under Section 2(d), proposed an amended identification of goods, and filed a Notice of Appeal.
`
`(cid:160) O
`
`n August 6, 2004, the applicant submitted an amendment to allege use.(cid:160) On September 1, 2004, the
`
`amendment to allege use was accepted.
`
`(cid:160) O
`
`n September 20, 2004,
`
`the amended identification of goods was accepted, and the request for
`
`reconsideration was refused and the final refusal maintained with regard to the Refusal to register the mark
`
`under Section 2(d).
`
`(cid:160)
`

`
`On November 26, 2004, the applicant filed its appeal brief, and the file was forwarded to the examining
`
`attorney for statement on December 6, 2004.
`
`ISSUE
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he issue on appeal is whether the mark, when used in connection with the identified goods, so resembles
`
`the mark in Registration No. 2293127 as to be likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive
`
`under Trademark Act Section 2(d).
`
`ARGUMENT
`
`BECAUSE THE MARKS WILL BE APPLIED TO CLOSELY RELATED GOODS,
`REGISTRATION OF E-WEAR, WHICH CREATES THE SAME COMMERCIAL
`IMPRESSION AS ELECTRONIC WEAR, IS LIKELY TO CREATE CONSUMER
`CONFUSION AS TO SOURCE
`
`(A)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) SIMILARITY OF THE MARKS
`
`THE MARKS CREATE THE SAME COMMERCIAL IMPRESSION
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`rademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration where an applied-for mark so resembles a registered mark
`
`that it is likely, when applied to the goods and/or services, to cause confusion, mistake or to deceive the
`
`potential consumer as to the source of the goods and/or services.(cid:160) TMEP §1207.01.(cid:160) The Court in In re E.
`
`I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973), listed the principal factors
`
`to consider in determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion.(cid:160) Among these factors are the
`
`similarity of the marks as to appearance, sound, meaning and commercial impression, and the relatedness
`
`of the goods and/or services.(cid:160) The overriding concern is to prevent buyer confusion as to the source of the
`
`goods and/or services.(cid:160) Miss Universe, Inc. v. Miss Teen U.S.A., Inc., 209 USPQ 698 (N.D. Ga. 1980).(cid:160)
`
`Therefore, any doubt as to the existence of a likelihood of confusion must be resolved in favor of the
`
`registrant.(cid:160) In re Hyper Shoppes (Ohio), Inc., 837 F.2d 463, 6 USPQ2d 1025 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
`
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`

`
`(cid:160) W
`
`hen determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion under Section 2(d), the question is not
`
`whether people will confuse the marks, but rather whether the marks will confuse the people into
`
`believing that the goods they identify emanate from the same source.(cid:160) In re West Point-Pepperell, Inc.,
`
`468 F.2d 200, 175 USPQ 558 (C.C.P.A. 1972).(cid:160) For that reason, the test of likelihood of confusion is not
`
`whether the marks can be distinguished when subjected to a side-by-side comparison.(cid:160) The question is
`
`whether the marks create the same overall impression.(cid:160) Visual Information Inst., Inc. v. Vicon Indus. Inc.,
`
`209 USPQ 179 (TTAB 1980).(cid:160) The focus is on the recollection of the average purchaser who normally
`
`retains a general rather than specific impression of trademarks.(cid:160) Chemetron Corp. v. Morris Coupling &
`
`Clamp Co., 203 USPQ 537 (TTAB 1979); TMEP §1207.01(b).
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he applicant applied to register the mark E-WEAR.(cid:160) The registered mark is ELECTRONIC WEAR.
`
`he commercial impression created by the applicant’s mark, E-WEAR, is the same as the registrant’s
`
`mark, ELECTRONIC WEAR.
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he prefix E- is a well-known abbreviation for “electronic,” and is commonly used as a prefix to
`indicate “electronic.” [2](cid:160) Moreover, numerous cases have recognized the “e” prefix as a descriptive
`
`designation for electronic when the mark is used for electronic goods and/or services.(cid:160) See generally, In re
`
`SPX Corp., 63 USPQ2d 1592 (TTAB 2002) (E-AUTODIAGNOSTICS merely descriptive of an
`
`“electronic engine analysis system comprised of a hand-held computer and related computer software”);
`
`In re Styleclick.com Inc., 57 USPQ2d 1445 (TTAB 2000) (E FASHION held merely descriptive of
`
`software for use in shopping via global computer network and electronic retailing services); Continental
`
`Airlines Inc. v. United Air Lines Inc., 53 USPQ2d 1385 (TTAB 1999) (E-TICKET held generic for
`
`computerized reservation and ticketing of transportation services).(cid:160)
`
`In this case, where the applicant’s
`
`goods are electronic,
`“electronic.” [3]
`
`the prefix “e” would be understood by potential purchasers as meaning
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he examining attorney makes reference to and incorporates herein a sample of excerpted articles from
`
`the LEXIS/NEXIS® computerized database included with the June 10, 2003 Office Action.(cid:160) The excerpts
`
`

`
`demonstrate that the letter “E” in the applicant’s mark would be understood as meaning “electronic.” (cid:160)
`
`The relevant parts of the articles read as follows:
`
`(cid:160) U
`
`SA Today, July 8, 1998.
`
`“When you see a technological term that starts with the letter ‘e’ and a hyphen, it most
`
`likely is an e-commerce-driven term.(cid:160) And nine times out of 10, the ‘e’ means electronic.”
`
`(cid:160) S
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`t. Petersburg Times, June 11, 2001.
`
`“It’s being called wearable electronics, or “e-wear.”
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he examining attorney also makes reference to an incorporates herein an excerpt of a sample
`
`representative article obtained from a search of the Internet using the Google® computerized database
`
`and included with the June 10, 2003 Office Action.(cid:160) The excerpt further demonstrates that the letter “e”
`
`in the applicant’s mark would be understood to mean “electronic.” (cid:160) The relevant part of the article reads
`
`as follows:
`
`(cid:160) h
`
`ttp://www.telemed.no/cparticle69113-4361.html.
`
`“Developments in textile technology and fibre industry are other components of the design
`
`concept of ewear (wearable electronics) for health care workers.”
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he word WEAR is defined as, “To carry or have habitually on the person… .”[4]
`
`he meaning of the two marks is the same, namely, electronic items which people habitually carry on
`
`them.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`The confusing similarity or the marks is compounded by the fact that the immediate image evoked by the
`
`marks, goods people habitually carry on them, are the types of goods at issue here, e.g., cellular phones,
`
`cellular video phones, digital cameras, audio players, video players, and camcorders.
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`

`
`In this case, the applicant’s mark is similar to the registrant’s mark in appearance and sound, and is
`
`identical to the registrant’s mark in meaning and commercial impression.
`
`(B)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) SIMILARITY OF THE GOODS
`
`determination of whether there is a likelihood of confusion is made solely on the basis of the goods
`
`(cid:160) A
`
`and/or services identified in the application and registration, without limitations or restrictions that are not
`
`reflected therein.(cid:160) In re Dakin’s Miniatures Inc., 59 USPQ2d 1593 (TTAB 1999).(cid:160) If the cited registration
`
`describes the goods and/or services broadly and there are no limitations as to their nature, type, channels
`
`of trade or classes of purchasers, then it is presumed that the registration encompasses all goods and/or
`
`services of the type described, that they move in all normal channels of trade, and that they are available
`
`to all potential customers.(cid:160) In re Linkvest S.A., 24 USPQ2d 1716 (TTAB 1992); TMEP §1207.01(a)(iii).
`
`(cid:160) A
`
`ny goods or services in the registrant’s normal fields of expansion must also be considered in order to
`
`determine whether the registrant’s goods or services are related to the applicant’s identified goods or
`
`services for purposes of analysis under Section 2(d).(cid:160) In re General Motors Corp., 196 USPQ 574 (TTAB
`
`1977).(cid:160) The test is whether purchasers would believe the product or service is within the registrant’s
`
`logical zone of expansion.(cid:160) CPG Prods. Corp. v. Perceptual Play, Inc., 221 USPQ 88 (TTAB 1983);
`
`TMEP §1207.01(a)(v).
`
`(cid:160) S
`
`ince the marks of the respective parties are highly similar and identical in meaning or commercial
`
`impression, the relationship between the goods or services of the respective parties need not be as close to
`
`support a finding of likelihood of confusion as might apply where differences exist between the marks. (cid:160)
`
`Amcor, Inc. v. Amcor Industries, Inc., 210 USPQ 70 (TTAB 1981); TMEP §1207.01(a).
`
`1.
`
`APPLICANT’S IDENTIFIED GOODS ARE CLOSELY RELATED TO AND WITHIN THE
`LOGICAL ZONE OF EXPANSION OF TRADE AS THE REGISTRANT’S GOODS
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he applicant’s identified goods, as amended are, “wearable portable audio/video products, namely,
`
`digital camcorders, digital still cameras, digital audio players and digital voice recorder; liquid crystal
`
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`

`
`display viewers for the viewing of videos, namely, video monitors and dot-matrix sd-enabled printers for
`
`printing digitally recorded video images, none of the above products to be featured in or as part of a
`
`cellular telephone or cellular telephone accessory.”
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he registrant’s identified goods include “cellular phones,” “digital display units,” “power supplies”
`
`and “voice storage circuits.”
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he applicant’s
`
`identified goods are substantially related to the registrant’s goods.(cid:160) That is,
`
`the
`
`applicant’s digital voice recorders can be used in conjunction with the registrant’s cellular phones and
`
`voice storage circuits.(cid:160) The registrant’s “digital display units” could be used in conjunction with the
`
`applicant’s digital camcorders and digital still cameras.
`
`(cid:160) W
`
`ithin the last several years, cellular telephones which incorporate cameras, camcorders, audio players,
`
`voice recorders and/or video monitors have become readily available to the consumer public.(cid:160) The
`
`registrant’s goods identified as “cellular phones” contain no limitations as to the features or functions of
`
`the phones.(cid:160) Therefore, the examining attorney must presume that they encompasses all goods of the type
`
`described, that they move in all normal channels of trade, and that they are available to all potential
`
`customers.(cid:160) That is, the examining attorney must presume that the registrant’s cellular phones encompass
`
`cellular phones which incorporate cameras, camcorders, audio players, voice recorders and video
`
`monitors.(cid:160) In re Linkvest S.A., 24 USPQ2d 1716 (TTAB 1992); TMEP §1207.01(a)(iii).
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he examining attorney makes reference to and incorporates herein a sample of excerpted articles from
`
`the LEXIS/NEXIS® computerized database included with the February 4, 2004 Final Refusal.(cid:160) The
`
`excerpts demonstrate that the applicant’s goods are features and/or functions of many cellular phones.(cid:160)
`
`The relevant parts of the articles which demonstrate(cid:160) the related nature of the goods read as follows:
`
`(cid:160) A
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160) A
`
`kron Beacon Journal (Ohio), January 29, 2004.
`
`“Students with cell phone cameras… .”
`
`rgus Leader (Sioux Falls, SD), January 24, 2004.
`
`

`
`“As cell phone camera usage becomes more popular… .”
`
`ewsday (New York), July 13, 2001.
`
`“…wireless mobile devices that combine cell phones with audio players are the future … .”
`
`BS News Transcripts, January 27, 2004.
`
`“Sales hit a three-year high as people bought cell phones with features such as cameras and
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160) N
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160) C
`
`audio players.”
`
`(cid:160) E
`
`lectronic Business, August 1, 2001.
`
`“Samsung was one of the first companies to introduce ‘converged’
`
`consumer devices,
`
`such as Uproar, its cell phone with a built-in MP3 audio player.”
`
`(cid:160) B
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`uffalo News (New York), January 26, 2003.
`
`“… cell phones that have digital voice recorders, cameras and computer access devices.”
`
`he examining attorney also makes reference to and incorporates herein a sample of representative
`
`articles obtained from a search of the Internet using the Google® computerized search engine and
`
`included with the February 4, 2004 Final Refusal.(cid:160) These articles also demonstrate that the applicant’s
`
`identified goods are features and/or functions of many cellular phones.(cid:160) The relevant parts of the articles
`
`which demonstrate the related nature of the goods read as follows:
`
`(cid:160) H
`
`ttp://www.ysatoday.com/tech/news/2004-01-16-cam-phone-quality_x.htm.
`
`“Tens of millions of these …pictures were snapped from cell phones in the United States
`
`during 2000, the first full year such services were available.”
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`

`
`Http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,57692,00.htm.
`
`“Global sales of mobile phones that can take, send, and receive pictures rose 65 percent in
`
`the last quarter from 5.2 million units to 8.6 million phones sold, according to market research firm
`
`Strategy Analysts.”
`
`(cid:160) H
`
`ttp://www.videosystems.primediabusiness.com/ar/video_sound_bells/.
`
`“Camera equipped cell phones, according to marketing research firm IDC, are likely to
`
`outsell digital still cameras this year and may even surpass all cameras, film and digital, by the end of next
`
`year.”
`
`(cid:160) H
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160) H
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160) H
`
`ttp://www.telestial.com/products/n_8910_gsm_cell_phone.htm.
`
`“Nokia 8910 … a phone packed with such standard functions as … voice recorder… .”
`
`ttp://www.cellularabroad.com/nokia7860gsm.html.
`
`The Nokia 7650 features include an integrated digital camera and voice recorder.
`
`ttp://www.telestial.com/products/m_p7389_gsm_cell_Phone.htm.
`
`“The Motorola Timesport series … features on this cellular phone include …a voice
`
`recorder… .”
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`

`
`Http://www.forbes.com/infoimaging/2003/07/16/ex_ik_0716tentech.htm.
`
`“Samsungs Anycall SCH-V330, a mobile phone with a camcorder function. …(cid:160) Camcorder
`
`phones allow users to shoot video clips with audio in addition to shooting still pictures.”
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he applicant’s goods are within the registrant’s logical zone of expansion.(cid:160) That is, the registrant could
`
`reasonably expand into the trade of digital camcorders, digital still cameras, digital audio players and
`
`digital voice recorder; liquid crystal display viewers for the viewing of videos, namely, video monitors
`
`and dot-matrix sd-enabled printers for printing digitally recorded video images.
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he examining attorney makes reference to and incorporates herein a sample of representative third party
`
`registrations included with the February 4, 2004 Final Refusal and the September 20, 2004 denial of the
`
`request for reconsideration.(cid:160) The third party registrations have probative value to the extent that they
`
`serve to suggest
`
`that
`
`the goods listed therein, namely, cellular telephone and cellular telephone
`
`accessories, and camcorders, cameras, audio players, voice recorders, liquid crystal displays, video
`
`monitors and printers, are of a kind that may emanate from a single source.(cid:160) In re Infinity Broadcasting
`
`Corp. of Dallas, 60 USPQ2d 1214, 1218 (TTAB 2001), citing In re Albert Trostel & Sons Co., 29
`
`USPQ2d 1783, 1785-86 (TTAB 1993).(cid:160) The relevant parts of some of the third party registrations which
`
`demonstrate the related nature of the goods read as follows:
`
`(cid:160) R
`
`(cid:160) R
`
`(cid:160) R
`
`(cid:160) R
`
`(cid:160) R
`
`egistration No. 2541823 – “… cellular telephones, digital cameras and camcorders… .”
`
`egistration No. 2565083 – “… cellular telephones, digital cameras and camcorders… .”
`
`egistration No. 2578879 – “… cameras, … digital cameras, … cellular telephones… .”
`
`egistration No. 2598648 – “… cellular telephones, … liquid crystal displays, … digital voice recorders.”
`
`egistration No. 2684369 – “… digital audio recorders, …digital cameras and/or camcorders, …cellular
`
`telephones, … audio tape and/or digital players … .”
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`

`
`(cid:160) R
`
`egistration No. 2701005 – “… digital audio recorders, …digital cameras and/or camcorders, …cellular
`
`telephones, … audio tape and/or digital players … .”
`
`(cid:160) R
`
`egistration No. 2709682 – “… cellular and digital phones, …video camcorders, digital still cameras,
`
`digital voice recorders… .”
`
`(cid:160) R
`
`egistration No. 2778270 – “… digital cameras, printers for digital cameras, …cellular telephones, …
`
`digital audio players… .”
`
`(cid:160) R
`
`egistration No. 2778230 – “… digital cameras, printers for digital cameras, …cellular telephones, …
`
`digital audio players… .”
`
`(cid:160) R
`
`egistration No. 2798239 – “…consumer electronics equipment, namely, cameras, camcorders, audio and
`
`video recorders and players, … cellular phones… .”
`
`(cid:160) R
`
`egistration No. 2753781 – “… digital still cameras, …digital video and audio recorders, … cellular
`
`telephones… .”
`
`(cid:160) R
`
`(cid:160) R
`
`egistration No. 2735350 – “… cellular telephones, … video monitors… .”
`
`egistration No. 2480744 – “…electronic displays for use as a component in camcorders, cameras, digital
`
`cameras, … cellular telephones, … crystal display screens.”
`
`2.
`
`THE RESPECTIVE GOODS MOVE IN THE SAME CHANNELS OF TRADE
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he applicant’s and registrant’s consumer electronics goods would be found in the same channels of
`
`trade.(cid:160) As evidenced by the excerpted Lexis® articles, the online articles, and the representative third
`
`party registrations attached to the Final Refusal dated February 4, 2004, and the refusal of the request for
`
`reconsideration dated September 20, 2004, companies manufacture and market the goods under the same
`
`(cid:160)
`

`
`mark, and the goods are sold through the same stores or websites.(cid:160) This is evidence that consumers are
`
`accustomed to viewing the same mark used in connection with the respective goods.(cid:160) Upon viewing marks
`
`which create the same commercial impression on such closely related goods, purchasers would mistakenly
`
`believe that the goods emanate from a common source.
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he applicant argues that confusion is unlikely because the purchasers at issue are sophisticated.(cid:160) In the
`
`electronics field, case decisions have held that the sale of related merchandise under the same or similar
`
`marks would be likely to cause confusion in spite of the sophistication and technical background of the
`
`purchasers.(cid:160) The fact that purchasers of products of the parties are well informed, technically trained, and
`
`a discriminating group of people does not mean that they are immune from confusing products as to
`
`source when the marks applied thereto are similar.(cid:160) Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Sanders
`
`Associates, Inc., 177 USPQ 720 (TTAB 1973).
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`(cid:160) T
`
`he applicant’s mark E-WEAR is likely to be confused with the registrant’s mark ELECTRONIC
`
`WEAR where the applicant’s mark has the same meaning and creates the same commercial impression
`
`as the registrant’s mark, are used on substantially related goods with overlapping functions, where the
`
`applicant’s goods are within the registrant’s logical field of expansion of trade, the goods can be made
`
`by the same companies, marketed under the same trademark, and sold through the same channels of trade
`
`to the same end consumers.(cid:160) For the foregoing reasons, it is
`
`respectfully submitted that the refusal of registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. Section
`
`1052(d), be affirmed.
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`/John Dwyer/
`Examining Attorney
`Law Office 116
`Telephone 571-272-9155
`Facsimile 571-273-9155
`
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`

`
`Meryl Hershkowitz
`Managing Attorney
`Law Office - 116
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160) (cid:160)
`
`[1] The identification reflects changes made by the applicant in correspondence dated August 4, 2004.
`[2] Cambridge English Dictionary.(cid:160) Copyright 2003 by Cambridge University Press.(cid:160) Attached as evidence to the Office
`Action dated June 10, 2003; Encarta World English Dictionary [North American Edition].(cid:160) Copyright 2004
`by
`Microsoft Corporation.(cid:160) Attached as evidence to the Final Refusal dated February 5, 2004.
`[3] The term ELECTRONIC means “of, relating to, produced by means of electronics.” (cid:160) The American
`heritage
`Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition.(cid:160) Copyright 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.(cid:160) Attached
`as
`evidence to the Final Refusal dated February 4, 2004.
`[4] The American heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition.(cid:160) Copyright 2000 by Houghton Mifflin
`Company.(cid:160) Attached as evidence to the Final Refusal dated February 4, 2004.
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)