RECENT DECSIONS BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ON REGISTRATION OF TRADE DRESS

1. RECENT DECSIONS BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ON REGISTRATION OF TRADE DRESS PRESENTED BY GEORGE W. LEWIS JAPANESE PATENT OFFICE APRIL 7, 2014

2. Background　バックグラウンド米国法典第15編（ランハム法）商標の定義Background　バックグラウンド米国法典第15編（ランハム法）商標の定義 • “any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof . . .いかなる言葉、名前、シンボル、又はデバイス（工夫）、又はそれらの組み合わせ • used by a person . . .人によって用いられる • to identify and distinguish his goods, including a unique product, from those manufactured or sold by others and to indicate the source of the goods, . . .” (15 U.S.C. § 1127)その者の商品を他の製造者又は他者の販売から識別して特定し、その商品の供給源を示す…

3. Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Prods. Co., 514 U.S. 159, 162 (1995) (cont’d)　最高裁Qualitex事件 • . “[T]he language of the Lanham Act describes [the universe of things that can qualify as a trademark] in the broadest of terms . . . since human beings might use as a ‘symbol’ or ‘device’ almost anything at all that is capable of carrying meaning, this language, read literally is not restrictive”人は殆ど全てのものにシンボルやデバイス（工夫）を用いるのでこの規定の文言そのものは制限的ではない― Qualitex v. Jacobson Prods. Co., 514 U.S. 159, 115 S. Ct. 1300 (1995)

4. Trade dress is registrable if the matter sought to be registered is: トレードドレスは下記の場合登録可能となる • inherently distinctive or has acquired distinctiveness; and本質的に識別力があるか、又は識別力が得られており、且つ • is not functional. • 機能的ではない場合

5. INHERENT DISTINCITVENESS本質的識別力 • Three following factors are to be considered in assessing a package design whether the designs at issue are inherently distinctive:包装デザインに本質的な識別力があるかについての３つのファクター • whether the packaging is a common basic shape or design;　　　包装は、普通の基本的形又はデザインを有しているか • whether it is unique or unusual in the particular field, and　　　　　　特定の分野においてユニーク又は非通常的であるか • whether it is a mere refinement of a commonly-adopted and well-known form of ornamentation for a particular class of goods viewed by the public as a dress or ornamentation for the goods.　特定の区分の商品について普通に用いられており、且つよく知られた形の外装を少し洗練させたに過ぎないものか否か

6. PROVING ACQUIRED DISTINCTIVENESS LITIGATION識別力が得られたことの証明 • Acquired distinctiveness requires proof that the consuming public associates the mark with a single source. • 識別力が得られたという立証の為には、消費者がそのマークを見て、１つの供給源を連想するか否かである

7. A feature is functional if it:　特徴が、もし下記の場合は機能的である • is essential to the use or purpose of the product, or　　　　　商品の使用ないし目的の為に必須である • it affects the cost or quality of the product and　　　　　　　商品のコストや品質に影響を及ぼす • would put competitors at a significant non-reputation related disadvantage.　競争企業に対して、名誉に影響しない不利益を被らせる • the existence of a utility patent that discloses the utilitarian advantages of the design sought to be registered; the existence of a utility patent that discloses the utilitarian advantages of the design sought to be registered; • advertising by the applicant that touts the utilitarian advantages of the design; advertising by the applicant that touts the utilitarian advantages of the design;

8. REGISTERED PRODUCT DESIGNS

9. AESTHETIC FUNCTIONALITY - Refusal of Black Color for Floral Packaging (In re Florists’ Transworld Delivery, Inc., 106 USPQ2d 1784 (TTAB 2013) [precedential]

10. "3-click" Sound Mark for Eyeglasses -In re Sutro Product Development, Inc., Serial No. 77418246 (August 1, 2013) [not precedential]

11. Non-Distinctive Product Design/Packaging for ClothingIn re Book to Bed, Inc., Serial No. 85262093 (June 21, 2013) [not precedential]

12. Hershey Bar Product Configuration - In re Hershey Chocolate and Confectionary Corporation, Serial No. 77809223 (June 28, 2012) [not precedential]

13. Thanks for your attention! Questions? • George W. Lewis, Esq. • Westerman, Hattori, Daniels & Adrian • Glewis@WHDA.com