We are a boutique IP firm located in Osaka, Japan, specializing in trademark, design, specific unfair competition and copyright matters.

Bottom line: The Board found “Andy’s Store” logo not confusingly similar to “ANDY with its transliteration in katakana”.

The applicant filed a trademark application for “Andy’s Store” logo shown below designating belts for clothing, T-shirts, casual wear, etc. in Class 25 and the goods in Classes 14, 16 and 18.  The examiner refused to register the mark, citing “ANDY with its transliteration in katakana” for clothing, etc. in Class 25. 

<Applied-for mark>

The designated goods of the applied-for mark are partially identical with those of the cited mark.  So, the question is whether the applied-for mark is similar to the cited mark or not.

The Board analyzed the applied-for mark and found as follows:

The applied-for mark is composed of a design of a person riding on the board with arms open and “Andy’s Store” in cursive letters.  “Andy’s Store” is unified as a whole in appearance and can be pronounced in one breath.  “Store” will not be directly recognized as the indication of the particular quality or the specific point of sale for goods even if it means a shop.  There is no circumstance that shows “Andy’s” functions independently as a source identifier.  Therefore, the applied-for mark is unified as a whole in appearance and sound.  It was inappropriate that the examiner recognized sound of the applied-for mark to be [andy] and found it similar to the cited mark.

And so the Board reversed the refusal, and granted registration of “Andy’s Store” logo.