Enrich Int’l.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 12, 1997

EX (T.T.A.B. Jun. 12, 1997)

THIS DISPOSITION IS NOT
CITABLE AS PRECEDENT OF THE TTAB
Paper No. 19
PTH
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________
In re Enrich International
________
Serial No. 74/424,233
_______
Berne S. Broadbent and Michele K. Nigliazzo for Enrich
International.
Steven R. Fine, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 107
(Thomas Lamone, Managing Attorney).
_______
Before Rice, Hairston and Walters, Administrative Trademark
Judges.
Opinion by Hairston, Administrative Trademark Judge:
This is an appeal from the Trademark Examining
Attorney's final refusal to register the mark AEON in typed
letters for skin lotions; skin cleansing lotions; skin
moisturizers; skin soaps; skin toners; skin emollients; skin
creams; skin cleansing creams; skin clarifiers; body
lotions; body creams; and night creams sold directly to home
purchasers and through independent home distributors.1

1Application Serial No. 74/424,233 filed August 13, 1993;
alleging a date of first use and a date of first use in commerce
of June 1, 1993.
Ser No. 74/424,233
2
Registration has been refused under Section 2(d) of the
Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1052(d), on the ground that
applicant's mark, when applied to its goods, so resembles
the registered mark E'ON 5 and design shown below for
cleansing creams, skin freshener, night creams, facial
finish, lipsticks, rouge, face powder, and skin care lotions
and creams2 as to be likely to cause confusion.

Applicant and the Examining Attorney have filed briefs.
No oral hearing was requested.3
In a previously decided appeal involving applicant's
application Serial No. 74/429,940, the Board held that
applicant's mark AEON and design for goods identical to
those herein was likely to cause confusion with the mark
cited herein, E'ON 5. A copy of the Board's May 29, 1997
decision is attached. The issues in the previously decided
appeal are virtually identical to those herein. Thus, for
the reasons stated in the prior decision, we find that
applicant's mark AEON in typed letters is likely to cause

2Registration No 1,551,550 issued August 15, 1989; Sections 8 &
15 affidavit filed.
3Although applicant indicated in its brief that it intended to
request an oral hearing, no such request was received by the
Board.
Ser No. 74/424,233
3
confusion with the registered mark E'ON 5 and design, when
used on the same and closely related cosmetics.
Decision: The refusal to register under Section 2(d)
of the Act is affirmed.
J. E. Rice
P. T. Hairston
C. E. Walters
Administrative Trademark
Judges, Trademark Trial
and Appeal Board
Ser No. 74/424,233
4