Successful And Lucrative Way To Respond To A Likelihood Of Confusion Refusal

Successful And Lucrative Way To Respond To A Likelihood Of Confusion Refusal

A rejection on the grounds of possibility of confusion is essentially a denial to register your mark as the trademark investigative legal representative trusts your mark is too close to a mark registered by somebody else. Existing over a probability of confusion refusal in a trademark application can be taxing.

Successful And Lucrative Way To Respond To A Likelihood Of Confusion Refusal

To persuade the Trademark Registration Service auditor that your trademark is not confusingly similar to the cited mark(s), you have two options available: • Submit arguments; or • Get the proprietor of the cited mark to sign a consent agreement.

Consent agreement In case your Trademark registration application has been rejected due to likelihood of confusion by the USPTO trademark examining attorney with one or more registered marks, you might want to discover a consent agreement with the owner of the cited registration. Before getting in touch with the registrant, you should verify that you have precedence over the cited mark and that the cited registration is less than five years old.

Successful And Lucrative Way To Respond To A Likelihood Of Confusion Refusal Reason for the registration proprietor agreeing to coexist But, why will a trademark owner want to sign a consent agreement that would permit someone else to register a debatably similar trademark? Unless the trademark owner is eager to consent out of utter kindness, the applicant has to put forth leverage to stimulate the registrant to make an allowance. And, that leverage usually comes in the form of the applicant having precedence over a trademark registration that is less than five years old.

In short, a registered mark that has not yet reached incontrovertible status is susceptible to cancellation based on the priority. To stay away from a costly litigation that can result in the cancellation of the registration, a trademark owner might be eager to negotiate a consent agreement with an applicant who can prove previous use in commerce.

Successful And Lucrative Way To Respond To A Likelihood Of Confusion Refusal Leverage can also come in other forms for instance, exposing a weakness or prospective invalidity of the registration. Examples might include desertion of the mark or partial abandonment for breakdown to sell certain services or goods which may very well be those that go beyond with the goods/services of the candidate.

Certainly, there are other ways to encourage Online Trademark Registration owners to reconcile, for instance financial and business incentives. Owners of indisputable registrations, however, are usually apathetic to reach a transaction just as they do not have to. Why would incontrovertible registration holders who were hard-working in getting their marks registered give way to laggards who took long time to apply?

Successful And Lucrative Way To Respond To A Likelihood Of Confusion Refusal Thus, whilst a consent agreement might be a lucrative option for conquering a probability of confusion rejection under the correct circumstances, the perfect tactic is to file trademark applications quickly. That way, you can all in all avoid the untidy situation of being a junior applicant /senior user trying to clear the obstacle of a senior registrant/junior user.

In addition to this, you can get in touch with a renowned law firm which has vast experience in dealing with likelihood of confusion denials and would be pleased to complete an approving review of your Office Action to see if they can assist you.

Successful And Lucrative Way To Respond To A Likelihood Of Confusion Refusal

Learn More: https://www.trademarks411.com/trademark/benefits-of-trade mark-registration https://www.trademarks411.com/trademark/registration-proc ess https://www.trademarks411.com/trademark/register-a-trade mark https://www.trademarks411.com/trademark/refusal-of-a-tra demark https://www.trademarks411.com/trademark/search-conflicti ng-trademarks