Patently Apple reports that the US Patent & Trademark Office has refused Apple’s application for a trademark in Touch ID. The decision, made in May but only now made public, is because another company already holds a trademark for Kronos Touch ID, and there is a “likelihood of confusion” given the very similar names. “USPTO states that “Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that so resembles a registered mark that it is likely that a potential consumer would be confused or mistaken or deceived as to the source of the goods and/or services of the applicant and registrant. In this case, the following factors are the most relevant: similarity of the marks, similarity of the goods and/or services, and similarity of trade channels of the goods and/or services.”
Today, the US Patent & Trademark Office published an official letter that was sent to Apple regarding their trademark application for “Touch ID” having been refused by their trademark examiner. Noteworthy is the fact that the letter was originally sent to Apple on May 7 and only made public today. That’s over a two month delay. The case against Apple’s Touch ID being registered seems to be solid and valid. Apple officially has six months to reply to USPTO with a work-around remedy or risk automatic trademark abandonment. With Apple likely to add their Touch ID feature to new iPads this fall, it’ll be interesting to see how Apple reacts to this latest news. The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has refused to register Apple’s “Touch ID” trademark based on there being a likelihood of confusion with the mark in U.S. Registration No. 2735480 as noted below. USPTO states that “Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that so resembles a registered mark that it is likely that a potential consumer would be confused or mistaken or deceived as to the source of the goods and/or services of the applicant and registrant. In this case, the following factors are the most relevant: similarity of the marks, similarity of the goods and/or services, and similarity of trade channels of the goods and/or services. The overriding concern is not only to prevent buyer confusion as to the source of the goods and/or services, but to protect the registrant from adverse commercial impact due to use of a similar mark by a newcomer.
