Torrefazione Italia LLC opposed the application of Trinidad Coffee Company, Inc. to register the mark shown to the right, for coffee, claiming likelihood of confusion with the two marks shown below, for coffee products. The goods are legally identical, and presumably they travel through the same channels of trade to the same classes of consumers. The Board found Petitioner’s marks to be “strong in the coffee beverage industry and thus accorded a broad scope of protection.” So it all percolated down to one issue: are the marks confusingly similar? They both depict griffins. How do you think this came out? Torrefazione Italia LLC v. Trinidad Coffee Company, Inc., Cancellation No. 92058192 (March 10, 2016) [not precedential].
The Board found that consumers are likely to recognize the animals depicted in the marks as griffins, a beast resembling a lion in a “rampant” stance. But consumers will also perceive the “major differences” in the animals:
Petitioner’s griffin has a large mane, wears a crown and has a long tail, a beak and soft wings. It resembles a lion. Respondent’s griffin has no mane or crown, sports a serpent-like tongue and scales on its wings, and has no tail. It does not resemble a lion. Notably, Respondent’s griffin’s legs are not visible; the griffin may be sitting on a pedestal or standing with legs obscured by the pedestal. Petitioner’s griffin is in the classic “rampant” position.
Moreover, comparing the marks in terms of overall appearance, pronunciation, connotation and commercial impressions, the Board concluded that there is no likelihood that consumers will confuse the source of each parties’ goods based on the marks.
As to appearance, the marks “do not look anything alike.” Petitioner’s marks include additional design features, including “concentric circles, curlicues, and an abstract representation of the Italian flag that underscores the Italian theme of the mark.” Moreover, the prominent wording TERRAFAZIONE ITALIA COFFEE encircles the mark.
Respondent’s mark is open at the top and features a seated griffin on a pedestal etched with the capital letter “T” surrounded by a laurel wreath. “The conspicuous griffin in the center of Respondent’s mark and the smaller griffin in Petitioner’s marks are so dissimilar in appearance, as are the marks overall, that the fact that both include a griffin design is an insufficient basis upon which to find likely confusion.”
As to pronunciation, Respondent’s letter “T” sounds nothing like TERRAFAZIONE ITALIA COFFEE [Doh! – ed.]. As to connotation, Petitioner’s marks suggest an Italian brand of coffee, whereas Respondent’s mark does not.
The CAFC has recognized that a single du Pont factor may be dispositive, “especially when that single factor is the dissimilarity of the mark.”
The Board therefore dismissed the petition for cancellation.