International Karate Organization [IKO] Kkyoku-shinkaikan and Shokei Matsuiv.Henriot Zephirin

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Feb 27, 2008

No. 91166753 (T.T.A.B. Feb. 27, 2008)

Mailed:
February 27, 2008
Bucher
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________

International Karate Organization Kyokushinkaikan
and Shokei Matsui
v.
Henriot Zephirin
________

Opposition No. 91166753
against Serial No. 76566572
_______

Arlen L. Olsen and Autondira S. Minor of Schmeiser Olsen &
Watts, LLP for International Karate Organization
Kyokushinkaikan and Shokei Matsui.

Kathryn Jennison Shultz and John N. Jennison of Jennison &
Shultz, P.C. for Henriot Zephirin.
_______

Before Bucher, Drost and Cataldo, Administrative Trademark
Judges.
Opinion by Bucher, Administrative Trademark Judge:
Henriot Zephirin, a U.S. citizen, seeks registration on
the Principal Register of the following mark:

THIS OPINION IS NOT A
PRECEDENT OF THE TTAB
Opposition No. 91166753
- 2 -
for services recited in the application as “educational and
entertainment services, namely clinics, camps, seminars,
tournaments and classes in the field of martial arts, self-
defense, kickboxing and aerobics” in International Class
41.1
International Karate Organization Kyokushinkaikan
(hereinafter “IKO Kyokushinkaikan” or “IKOK”) and Shokei
Matsui (hereinafter “Matsui”) have opposed the application
on the ground of likelihood of confusion, alleging that
applicant’s mark, when used in connection with the recited
services, so resembles a number of opposers’ previously used
mark, two of which have been registered by opposer Matsui:

for “videotapes, audiocassettes, cd-roms,
software featuring martial arts” in
International Class 9;
“posters, books featuring martial arts
instruction, instructional martial arts
manuals; stationery, and calendars” in
International Class 16;
“gym bags, duffel bags, wallets,
umbrellas, and fanny packs” in
International Class 18;
“clothing, namely, sweatshirts, t-shirts,
exercise outfits, vests, hats and caps”
in International Class 25;
“toys, namely, dolls, sporting goods,
karate gloves and karate kick pads” in
International Class 28;

1 Application Serial No. 76566572 was filed on December 23,
2003 based upon applicant’s allegation of first use anywhere and
use in commerce at least as early as September 8, 1996. No claim
is made to the wording “North American Kyokushin Organization”
apart from the mark as shown.
Opposition No. 91166753
- 3 -
“financial sponsorship of martial arts
competitions and exhibitions” in
International Class 36;
“educational services, namely, martial
arts instruction through classes,
seminars and workshops; martial arts
competitions; and conducting
entertainment exhibitions in the nature
of martial arts exhibitions” in
International Class 41;2
INTERNATIONAL
KARATE
ORGANIZATION
for “posters, books featuring martial
arts instruction, instructional martial
arts manuals; stationery, and calendars”
in International Class 16;
“financial sponsorship of martial arts
competitions and exhibitions” in
International Class 36; and
“educational services, namely, martial
arts instruction through classes,
seminars and workshops; martial arts
competitions; and conducting
entertainment exhibitions in the nature
of marital arts exhibitions” in
International Class 41,3

as to be likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake or to
deceive under Section 2(d) of the Lanham
Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(d). Opposers also
claimed common law rights in an
unregistered Kanku design mark alone

2 Registration No. 2962749 issued to Shokei Matsui a.k.a. Jang
Kyu Moon, a citizen of Korea, on June 21, 2005. According to the
registration, the non-Latin characters in the mark transliterate
to “Kyokushinkai” and this means “Ultimate Truth” in English.

3 Registration No. 2962750 issued to Shokei Matsui a.k.a. Jang
Kyu Moon, a citizen of Korea, on June 21, 2005 under Section 2(f)
of the Act.

Opposition No. 91166753
- 4 -
[Zephirin Dep., exhibits 14, 16, 18], and the red Kanku
design in conjunction with the Japanese Kyokushinkai
pictogram of Reg. No. 2962749. Zephirin Dep., Exhibit 22
Applicant, in his answer, has denied all of the salient
allegations in the notice of opposition. While applicant
interposed several affirmative defenses, he did not file any
counterclaims to cancel opposer Matsui’s registrations.
The Record
By operation of the rules, the record includes the
pleadings and the file of the opposed application. In
support of their case, opposers made of record the testimony
deposition of applicant, Henriot Zephirin, taken on March
27, 2007, with Exhibits 1 - 30, and under Notice of
Reliance, certified status and title copies of opposer
Shokei Matsui’s valid and subsisting pleaded U.S. Trademark
Registrations set out above.
The Parties
Applicant identifies himself as the Grand Master and
Chairman of North American Kyokushin Organization (NAKO) and
the owner, president and CEO of Henri-Oh’s Total Fitness &
Karate Center. Applicant offers clinics, seminars and
classes at his fitness center in Sunnyside, New York, which
also doubles as his NAKO headquarters. Applicant provides
seminars, holds camps and tournaments in locations from the
Opposition No. 91166753
- 5 -
Canadian Rockies to Atlantic City, and from New York to
Pennsylvania. Applicant has an active website
(www.henrioh.com), uses audio advertisement, promotional
fliers, video advertisement as well as advertisements in
karate magazines. Zephirin deposition, pp. 33 – 61,
Exhibits 9 – 13, 15, 19 – 21, 24 - 25
According to applicant’s testimony and attached
exhibits, Kancho Shokei Matsui is the president (or
chairman) of an organization headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
variously referred to as International Karate Organization
Kyokushinkaikan, International Karate Organization
Kyokushin-kaikan, IKO Kyokushinkaikan, IKO or IKOK. As the
name suggests, it purports to be an international
organization with branches all around the world, having
various Branch Chiefs in cities in the United States,
including New York City. Opposers appear to hold
tournaments, conferences and championships all around the
world, including specific events in Japan, Italy, Canada,
and Chile and in California and New York. Opposers maintain
a strong presence on the Internet with links to other
organizations in Budō, the Japanese martial arts. Zephirin
deposition, pp. 71 – 82, Exhibits 17 – 18, 22
As long ago as May 1995, opposer Matsui warned
applicant about unfair competition with “The United States
Opposition No. 91166753
- 6 -
Kyokushin Organization,” his alleged “black market” sale of
IKO Kyokushinkaikan videotapes, and the use of “trademarked
Kyokushin logos” on his signs, written materials, etc.
Accordingly, as of May 1995 applicant’s previous license as
a Kyokushin Branch Chief and dojo operator was officially
terminated. Zephirin deposition, Exhibit 26
Then again, on February 21, 1996, trademark counsel for
opposer Matsui sent applicant a cease
and desist letter objecting to his use
of the term “Kyokushin” because of
alleged likelihood of confusion with the
then-registered MAS OYAMA’S U.S.A.
KYOKUSHIN KARATE mark. Zephirin
deposition, Exhibit 27
Applicant’s own website says that “Kancho Henri-oh
[Henriot Zephirin] was [at that time] a 6th Degree black belt
as awarded by Sosai Mas. Oyama, the founder of the
Kyokuskin-kai organization.” Zephirin deposition, Exhibit 9
Applicant testified that while he has met Mr. Matsui, he has
never had any kind of working relationship with him.
Applicant testified that he knew of International Karate
Organization, an organization also called “IKO,” but that
until the time of his testimony, he had never heard of an
Opposition No. 91166753
- 7 -
organization known as “IKOK.” Zephirin deposition, pp. 94 -
96
Standing
The first issue that we must address is opposers’
standing to bring this opposition. Applicant contends that
neither opposer has proven standing to maintain this
opposition. “[A] party opposing a registration pursuant to
Section 13 of the Lanham Act [15 U.S.C. § 1063] must show
that he has standing and a statutory ground which negates
the applicant’s entitlement to registration.” Young v. AGB
Corp., 152 F.3d 1377, 47 USPQ2d 1752, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
As to opposer Shokei Matsui, we note that establishing
ownership of an allegedly confusingly similar registration
is sufficient to prove standing. Cunningham v. Laser Golf
Corp., 222 F.3d 943, 55 USPQ2d 1842, 1844 (Fed. Cir. 2000)
[“In this case, as stated earlier, Laser Golf owns two prior
registrations. These registrations and the products sold
under the mark they register suffice to establish Laser
Golf’s direct commercial interest and its standing to
petition for cancellation of Cunningham’s LASERSWING mark”].
In this context, opposer Matsui has introduced into evidence
two recently issued registrations by submitting current
status and title copies of such registrations under a notice
of reliance. 37 CFR § 2.122(d).
Opposition No. 91166753
- 8 -
Applicant appears to be taking the position that
opposer’s claimed marks are so different there is not even a
colorable claim of likelihood of confusion. We disagree.
The calligraphy in opposer Matsui’s first claimed mark
comprises Chinese characters that are used in modern
Japanese, called “Kanji.” According to the registration,
this design mark transliterates as “Kyokushinkai.” Opposer
Matsui’s second alleged mark consists of the wording,
INTERNATIONAL KARATE ORGANIZATION. As discussed above,
the mark in the involved application is a composite mark
containing prominently the words “North American Kyokushin
Organization.” While this degree of commonality is clearly
not determinative on the ultimate question of likelihood of
confusion, the similarities in the various marks are
sufficient to support opposer Matsui’s claim of damages.
Accordingly, inasmuch as opposer Matsui’s registrations
serve as evidence in support of his claim of damage, we find
that Matsui has shown that he has an interest beyond that of
the general public, he is not a mere intermeddler, and has
standing to bring this opposition. Therefore, we deny
applicant’s request that we dismiss this proceeding with
prejudice on this ground. Ritchie v. Simpson, 170 F.3d
1092, 50 USPQ2d 1023 (Fed. Cir. 1999).
Opposition No. 91166753
- 9 -
As to opposer IKO Kyokushinkaikan, it has clearly not
demonstrated ownership of any allegedly confusingly similar
registered mark. In view of the express language of
Section 5 of the Statute, only the registrant can rely upon
the prima facie presumptions afforded a registration under
Section 7(b) of the Trademark Act. Although we see from web
pages that Kancho Shokei Matsui claims to be the chairman of
the International Karate Organization (“IKO”) and president
of the International Karate Organization Kyokushinkaikan
(“IKOK”), it is not clear that this relationship confers
standing upon the International Karate Organization
Kyokushinkaikan. Hence, on this rather sparse record, we
conclude that IKOK has failed to demonstrate its standing to
bring this opposition.
Priority
Applicant further contends that neither opposer has
demonstrated priority. However, as to opposer Matsui,
priority is not an issue because opposer pleaded and later
proved he is the owner of Registration Nos. 2962749 and
2962750 -- two valid and subsisting registrations of his
pleaded marks. See King Candy Co. v. Eunice King’s Kitchen,
Inc., 496 F.2d 1400, 182 USPQ 108 (CCPA 1974). The only way
for applicant to attack this registration is with a
counterclaim for cancellation. Contour Chair-Lounge Co. v.
Opposition No. 91166753
- 10 -
The Englander Co., 324 F.2d 186, 139 USPQ 285, 287 (CCPA
1963) [“[T]his is an opposition only and in an opposition,
this court has always held that the validity of the
opposer’s registrations are not open to attack”];
Cosmetically Yours, Inc. v. Clairol, Inc., 424 F.2d 1385,
165 USPQ 515, 517 (CCPA 1970) [“As long as the registration
relied upon by an opposer in an opposition proceeding
remains uncanceled, it is treated as valid and entitled to
the statutory presumptions”]. Moreover, the earliest date
on which applicant can rely is the filing date of its
application, December 23, 2003.4 Accordingly, we find that
opposer Matsui has established his priority over applicant.
Athough much has been made of the ubiquitous
Kanku design mark, often appearing in red, opposer
Matsui has failed to lay any foundation for what
this alleged mark entails. Applicant’s trial deposition was
the only testimony in evidence. Although applicant’s mark
contains elements of this design, he pleaded ignorance about
whether an individual or organization has any proprietary
right in this symbol. There is a single exhibit, seemingly

4 Applicant’s vague testimony about his own first date of use
of his applied-for mark more than a decade ago in connection with
services listed in the subject application is irrelevant under
these circumstances. Zephirin deposition, pp. 12 – 13

Opposition No. 91166753
- 11 -
drawn from a Canadian website, which best explains this
symbol as follows:
“The internationally recognized symbol of
Kyokushin Karate, the Kanku, which originates
from the kata Kanku Dai. In this form, the
hands are raised to the sky with the fingers
touching. The logo interprets the fingers as
the points implying the peaks, representing
the wrists as the wide sections, signifying
power. The centre represents infinity and
the circle that encloses the parts,
continuity and circular motion. It is the
utilization of this circular movement in the
execution of techniques that distinguishes
Kyokushin Karate from traditional styles of
karate that rely on simple linear motion.”

Zephirin dep., Exh. 30 http://www.kyokushin.ca/index2.html

Accordingly, while it appears from this record that this
symbol has enjoyed widespread usage in connection with the
Kyokushin school of Japanese martial arts, on this record,
we can find no previous, common law ownership rights with
the remaining opposer, Mr. Matsui.
Analysis: Likelihood of Confusion
Our determination under Section 2(d) is based upon an
analysis of all of the probative facts in evidence that are
relevant to the factors bearing on the issue of likelihood
of confusion. In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d
1357, 177 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1973). In any likelihood of
confusion analysis, two key considerations are the
similarities between the marks and the relationship of the
Opposition No. 91166753
- 12 -
goods and/or services. Federated Foods, Inc. v. Fort Howard
Paper Co., 544 F.2d 1098, 192 USPQ 24 (CCPA 1976).
The Services and Goods
We turn first to the du Pont factor focusing on the
relationship of the services and goods as described in the
application and in the cited registrations. We start by
noting that both applicant and opposer Matsui offer
educational and entertainment services related to karate-dō,
specifically, offering classes, seminars, exhibitions or
tournaments, and workshops or clinics. Not only are the
parties’ services legally identical, but also the record
indicates that both are actually providing Japanese martial
arts-related services in the same field or particular branch
of the martial arts – Kyokushin Karate. This du Pont factor
favors a finding of likelihood of confusion.
Channels of Trade
Turning to the du Pont factors dealing with the
similarity or dissimilarity of established, likely-to-
continue trade channels, we must presume that applicant’s
services and opposer Matsui’s goods and services will move
through all of the normal channels of trade to all of the
usual consumers of services and goods of the type recited.
See Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, National Association
Opposition No. 91166753
- 13 -
v. Wells Fargo Bank, 811 F.2d 1490, 1 USPQ2d 1813, 1815
(Fed. Cir. 1987). Because applicant’s recitation includes
the same educational and entertainment services recited in
the cited registration, the channels of trade must be deemed
to be the same. Hence, this du Pont factor favors a finding
of likelihood of confusion.
The conditions under which / buyers to whom sales are made
We find that of the prospective purchasers of these
services and goods – ranging from free, introductory
sessions or inexpensive items up to several hundred dollars
for a course of instruction – not all participants can be
deemed to be sophisticated. Undoubtedly, while some of the
purchasers of martial arts services (e.g., 8th degree Black
Belts winning International competitions) are sophisticated,
other prospective purchasers of these services would be
newbies, ordinary purchasers seeking to begin a martial arts
program. We assume that these latter consumers will apply
an ordinary standard of care to purchasing decisions, and
hence, this du Pont factor too favors a finding of
likelihood of confusion.
The Marks
We turn then to the critical du Pont factor involving
the similarities or dissimilarities in the appearance,
Opposition No. 91166753
- 14 -
sound, connotation and commercial impression of the
respective marks. Palm Bay Imports Inc. v. Veuve Clicquot
Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772, 396 F.3d 1369, 73 USPQ2d
1689, 1692 (Fed. Cir. 2005). We note, in discussing this
factor that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has
held that when marks appear, as is the case herein, on
“virtually identical goods or services, the degree of
similarity necessary to support a conclusion of likely
confusion declines.” Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v.
Century Life of America, 970 F.2d 874, 23 USPQ2d 1698, 1701
(Fed. Cir. 1992).
Under actual market conditions, consumers generally do
not have the luxury of making side-by-side comparisons. The
proper test in determining likelihood of confusion is not a
side-by-side comparison of the marks, but rather, the
decision must be based on the similarity of the general
overall commercial impressions engendered by the involved
marks. See Puma-Sportschuhfabriken Rudolf Dassler KG v.
Roller Derby Skate Corporation, 206 USPQ 255 (TTAB 1980).
Nonetheless, applicant contends that there are such
significant dissimilarities between its mark and opposer
Matsui’s registered marks that this is a case where a single
du Pont factor may be dispositive in a likelihood of
confusion analysis. Indeed, there are cases where it is
Opposition No. 91166753
- 15 -
proper for the Board to rely solely upon the dissimilarity
of the marks in dismissing an opposition. For example, in
Champagne Louis Roederer, S.A. v. Delicato Vineyards, 148
F.3d 1373, 47 USPQ2d 1459 (Fed. Cir. 1998), the Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit did not find clear error in
the Board’s finding that CRYSTAL CREEK for wine was not
likely to cause confusion with CRISTAL for champagne,
primarily because of the difference in the marks. See also

Genesco Inc. v. Martz, 66 USPQ2d
1260 (TTAB 2003) [despite
overlapping goods and trade
channels, the difference between
the parties marks is “pivotal”].

“Kyokushin” and “Kyokushinkai”
Turning then to the registered marks, the record shows
several distinct variations on the “Kyokushin-” root. All
of the references are to a system of karate developed in
Japan by Sosai Masutatsu (‘Mas’) Oyama (1923 – 1994), a
style that he dubbed “Ultimate Truth.” In the absence of
any clear dictionary definitions in the record, we find that
the information contained in the overall record only hints
at the subtle differences in connotation created by adding
Opposition No. 91166753
- 16 -
the suffixes, “-kai” (and “-kaikan”) to the “Kyokushin-”
root.
We begin by focusing on opposer Matsui’s Japanese
pictogram. According to the registration, this Japanese
pictogram is transliterated as “Kyokushinkai.”
It is clear from the record that for years
applicant has been embroidering this
“Kyokushinkai” calligraphy on all its karate
uniforms, or dogi, distributed throughout North
America. Zephirin deposition, p. 80, exhibits 19
– 21 In fact, it is also clear that opposers and
other regional and national organizations do likewise all
around the globe. Zephirin deposition, p. 82, exhibit 23
This transliterated term shares the “Kyokushin” meaning of
“Ultimate Truth” but in this context seems to refer more to
the organization or society. Zephirin deposition, pp. 78,
87 - 88
Hence, opposer Matsui’s transliteration is very similar
in connotation to the word “Kyokushin,” shown in Western
characters within applicant’s mark (with the added suffix
“-kai” not found in applicant’s composite mark). According
to the record, the term “Kyokushin” is comprised of two
Japanese words, “Kyoku” (ultimate, utmost, extreme) and
“Shin” (reality, truthfulness or truth from within).
Opposition No. 91166753
- 17 -
Zephirin deposition, Exhibit 30 Hence, this term too
translates into the English language as “the true way” or
“the ultimate truth.” This form of the word appears to be
used in connection with the philosophy, the technique, and
the specific history brought to this system of martial arts
by its founder, Masutatsu (‘Mas’) Oyama, who chose the
“Kyokushin” designation as a source indicator.
In the caption of this proceeding, the final letter “K”
in opposer IKOK’s name is “Kyokushinkaikan”. Like
“Kyokushinkai,” “Kyokushinkaikan” seems to focus more on the
organizational structure than the underlying philosophy
(“Kyokushin”). Zephirin deposition, p. 78
In any case, the adverse parties herein make quite
different arguments about the meaning of the term
“Kyokushin” and/or “Kyokushinkai” to members of the relevant
public. While opposer claims “Kyokushinkai” is a strong
source-indicator, applicant contends that this is a term
that simply refers to what is basically a style of karate-dō
having a history and philosophy, techniques, instruction or
curriculum and patterns of movement (kata) that differ from
other, related strands of Japanese martial arts.
From the entire record, we can surmise that applicant
has concluded that the Kyokushin-related terms at dispute
herein have become generic when used in connection with a
Opposition No. 91166753
- 18 -
defined school of Japanese martial arts, that the Kyokushin
logos have all been used indiscriminately and licensed
worldwide without sufficient quality controls, or that the
plethora of users shown in the record reflects a confused
and splintered state of ownership of these marks, beginning
in Japan. While any or all of these theories may be gleaned
from the record, applicant, as noted, has not filed a
counterclaim to cancel this registration on any of these
bases. Accordingly, we must accord opposer Matsui’s
Kyokushinkai registration all of the statutory presumptions
of Section 7(b) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1057(b).
While applicant has disclaimed the wording, “North
American Kyokushin Organization,” that does not obviate a
bar of likelihood of confusion, and the word Kyokushin,
still forms a significant portion of applicant’s mark for
purposes of our likelihood of confusion analysis.
For while we must consider the marks in their
entireties, in articulating reasons for reaching a
conclusion on the issue of likelihood of confusion, there is
nothing improper in stating that, for rational reasons, more
or less weight has been given to a particular feature of a
mark. See In re National Data Corp., 753 F.2d 1056,
224 USPQ 749 (Fed. Cir. 1985). When viewed through the eyes
of someone having an interest in Japanese martial arts who
Opposition No. 91166753
- 19 -
is also somewhat knowledgeable about the modern Japanese
language, the sole portion of registrant’s mark is
“Kyokushinkai” while the term one would use to call for
applicant’s services contains as its most distinctive term
“Kyokushin.”
There are obvious differences between these marks in
overall appearance – applicant’s mark has descriptive words
like “North American” and “Organization,” the organization’s
initials, “N.A.K.O.,” the silhouetted image of a martial
artist in action, and all of this against the Kanku
background. However, we conclude that the most distinctive
single element in applicant’s composite mark is the word
“Kyokushin.” Similarly, as to sound, the transliterated
sound of the Japanese pictogram sounds quite similar to the
word “Kyokushin” within applicant’s mark. Again, when
compared in their entireties, we cannot ignore the fact that
applicant’s spoken mark would also include “North American,”
“Organization,” and the organization’s initials, “N.A.K.O.”
On the other hand, “[w]hile the marks are concededly
distinguishable in their appearance and sound, it is our
view that the equivalency in meaning or connotation is
sufficient, in this case, to find likelihood of confusion.”
Cf. In re Perez, 21 USPQ2d 1075, 1077 [El GALLO v. ROOSTER].
Opposition No. 91166753
- 20 -
Applicant seems to take the position that we need not
deal with the similarities in the connotations of these
marks created by this transliteration because “ … Asian
languages such as Japanese, Korean and Chinese are not
‘common languages’ ….” We disagree. Clearly, a sizable
number of consumers in the United States are familiar with
both the Chinese and English languages. In re Oriental
Daily News, Inc., 230 USPQ 637, 638 (TTAB 1986). The
Chinese language is spoken by more than one billion people,
and hence is the number one spoken language in the world.
Arguably, kanji characters, having both Chinese- and
Japanese-language origins, qualify as one of the most
“common” written languages on the planet. We find that this
would include ordinary purchasers in the United States of
America who are knowledgeable in the languages of Chinese
and Japanese, and would be able to transliterate
registrant’s mark to “Kyokushinkai.” Cf. In re Thomas,
79 USPQ2d 1021, 1024 (TTAB 2006). We take judicial notice
of information obtained from the United States Census
Bureau, Census 2000, that Chinese and Japanese have been
heavily represented in the U.S. for several generations, and
according to the latest decennial census, there are almost
Opposition No. 91166753
- 21 -
one million people of Japanese descent in the United
States.5
As noted earlier, while the marks have obvious
differences when compared in their entireties as to
appearance and sound, we find that the identity in
connotation is sufficient to support a finding of likelihood
of confusion, especially as used in connection with
identical educational and entertainment services. The fact
that the marks have the same connotation, resulting in a
similar overall commercial impression, is sufficient for us
to conclude that confusion is likely, despite the
differences in their appearance and sound. In re American
Safety Razor Co., 2 USPQ2d 1459 (TTAB 1987).
We conclude that consumers familiar with opposer

Matsui’s services offered under the
calligraphy mark, upon encountering
applicant’s applied-for composite mark
used in connection with legally-identical educational and
entertainment services, would be likely to believe that the
services originated with or are somehow associated with or
sponsored by the same entity.

5 See U.S.
v. Bailey, 97 F.3d 982, 985 (7th Cir. 1996) [judicial notice taken
of facts from Census Bureaus Statistical Abstract of the United
States]; Knox v. Butler, 884 F.2d 849, 852 n. 7 (5th Cir. 1989)
[judicial notice appropriately taken of census data]; Citizens
Financial Group Inc. v. Citizens National Bank of Evans City,
383 F.3d 110, 72 USPQ2d 1389 (3d Cir. 2004). See also In re
Opposition No. 91166753
- 22 -
Lastly, to the extent that any of the points raised by
applicant raise a doubt about our finding of likelihood of
confusion, that doubt is required to be resolved in favor of
the prior registrant. In re Martin’s Famous Pastry Shoppe,
Inc., 748 F.2d 1565, 223 USPQ 1289 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
INTERNATIONAL KARATE ORGANIZATION
In their notice of opposition, opposers pleaded a
second registration, Reg. No. 2962750, for the mark
INTERNATIONAL KARATE ORGANIZATION. During their testimony
period, a certified status and title copy of the
registration was submitted. However, in his brief, Kancho
Shokei Matsui, failed to address this claim at all.
Therefore, we agree with applicant that the sole remaining
opposer has waived this claim.
Decision: As to opposer IKO Kyokushinkaikan, the
opposition is dismissed. As to opposer Kancho Shokei
Matsui, his opposition based upon Registration No. 2962749
is sustained on the basis of likelihood of confusion under
Section 2(d) of the Lanham Act, and registration to
applicant is hereby refused.

Spirits International N.V., ___ USPQ2d _____, Serial No. 74382759
(TTAB February 11, 2008), slip op. at 18 n. 11..
Opposition No. 91166753
- 23 -
- o O o -