Skip to Content
Natural Wonders CA, Inc. & AM Industries LLC v. Livell Company
Opposition No. 91264168
In a decisive win for our clients, Peretz Chesal & Herrmann successfully persuaded the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) to sustain an opposition against the registration of the mark MYCARE HEATING PAD. The Board found the mark confusingly similar to our clients’ long-standing MY HEATING PAD mark for identical heating pad products.
The TTAB weighed the relevant DuPont factors and concluded that the marks were similar in appearance, sound, and commercial impression, and that the goods, channels of trade, and consumer classes were identical. While the Board noted the conceptual weakness of our clients’ mark due to its suggestive nature, this was outweighed by the high degree of similarity between the marks and the identity of the goods.
Ultimately, the Board held that consumers encountering MYCARE HEATING PAD would likely believe it originated from or was authorized by the owner of MY HEATING PAD.
Outcome: The TTAB sustained the opposition under Section 2(d) of the Lanham Act—blocking registration of MYCARE HEATING PAD and securing a complete victory for our clients.