For the whole decision click here: o13905
Result
Section 5(2)(b): - Opposition failed.
Section 5(4)(a): - Opposition successful.
Points Of Interest
Summary
The opposition was based on registrations of the mark RIGID-TEX in Class 6 and use of the trade mark RALTEX.
Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer quickly found that the respective marks RIGID-TEX and RALTEX were not similar, “indeed (they were) distinctively dissimilar”. This difference was such that there was no likelihood of confusion, other factors notwithstanding. The Section 5(2)(b) opposition failed accordingly.
Under Section 5(4)(a), however, the opponent’s use of the mark RALTEX had, at the material date, established a protectable goodwill in that mark in relation to patterned stainless steel. Damage would occur and consequently the Hearing Officer found the opposition to have succeeded.
Costs were awarded to the opponent, appropriately adjusted for a litigant in person