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 that “dtsX” logo is not confusingly similar to “DTSX” logo.

The applicant filed a trademark application for “dtsX” logo shown below designating electronic machines, apparatus and their parts; telecommunication machines and apparatus; etc. in Class 9.　The examiner refused to register the mark, citing “DTSX” logo also shown below for electronic machines, apparatus and their parts; telecommunication machines and apparatus; etc. in Class 9.

<Applied-for mark>


<Cited mark>


The applied-for mark and the cited mark share some of the designated goods in common.  Accordingly, the question is whether the applied-for mark is similar to the cited mark or not.

The Board analyzed both marks and found as follows:

- The applied-for mark is composed of “dts” and stylized “X”.  The letter dts is connected to each other.  X is written in large and heavy Gothic font and has 4 white lines within.  Accordingly, the applied-for mark will be divided into “dts” and “X”.  “dts” is widely known as a sign indicating an audio technology “digital theater system” developed by the applicant.  “dts” gives more dominant impression to consumers and traders than stylized “X”.  So, the applied-for mark is pronounced [d-t-s-x] and [d-t-s] and means “digital theater system X”.

- The cited mark is unified as a whole in appearance.  It is pronounced [d-t-s-x] and has no particular meaning.

- The applied-for mark and the cited mark are apparently distinguishable in appearance.  The marks share the sound [d-t-s-x].  Semantically, the mark is not likely to cause confusion.  Considering these factors comprehensively, the marks are not similar to each other.

And so the Board reversed the refusal, and granted registration of “dtsX” logo.