The Intellectual Property Appellate Tribunal (IPAB) has upheld the refusal by Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks for registration of ‘Kadio,’ the trade mark of Dejamus Assets Limited and ruled in favour of ‘Casio’, the trade mark of Casio Keisanki Kabushiki Kaisha.
The case dates back to the application submitted in 2006 for registration given by Dejamus Assets, based in British Virgin Island and a manufacturer of electronic goods. On publication of the application in the Trade Marks Journal, Casio Keisanki Kabushiki Kaisha, a Japanese firm producing and selling calculators, cameras, wrist watches and digital clocks under the trade mark ‘Casio,’ objected to the proposed trade mark, contending that this would cause confusion among the public.
Accepting its objection, the Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks denied the registration of the mark ‘Kadio.’ Hence, Dejamus filed the present appeal before the IPAB.
In its appeal, the Dejamus contended that the Deputy Registrar erroneously held that the rival marks ‘Casio’ and ‘Kadio’ were deceptively similar. The marks were visually, phonetically and structurally, dissimilar and there had been no instance of confusion and deception. Dismissing the appeal filed by Dejamus, the Bench, comprising vice-chairman S. Usha and member V. Ravi said “the rival marks are deceptively similar.” The goods were purchased by customers, both literate and illiterate. “In the words ‘Kadio’ and ‘Casio,’ the pronunciation is ‘Ka’ and the letters ‘d’ and ‘c,’ if slurred, would definitely be mistaken for the other.”
Holding that ‘Casio’ was the prior user, the Board said the subsequent adoption [by Dejamus] and use did not acquire a status to be registered.
