Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
28 February 2007
Hearing Officer
Mr G Salthouse
D (stylised) & device of a triangle
09, 37, 38, 42
Damovo Group SA
Analog Devices Inc
Sections 5(2)(b), 5(3) & 5(4)(a)


Section 5(2)(b): Opposition failed. Section 5(3): Opposition failed. Section 5(4)(a): Opposition failed.

Points Of Interest

  • 1. Comparison of the marks: triangle inside square v triangle inside border which could be seen as letter D.
  • 2. Mark as used compared with mark as registered.


The opposition was based on the opponents’ registered mark, a device of a triangle in a square, in class 9 and their use of the same mark with the additional words ANALOG DEVICES, on all the goods and services specified in the application.

Following a detailed assessment of the mark the Hearing Officer, in summary, concluded that the strong border surrounding the applications’ mark would clearly be seen as the letter D and would therefore be ‘oralised’, which was not the case in respect of the opponents’ mark. In the result he found no likelihood of confusion and the opposition under Section 5(2)(b) failed accordingly.

Under Section 5(3) the Hearing Officer found that the opponents had failed to demonstrate reputation; but in case he should be wrong in this he went on to find that they had not shown detriment either.

Neither did the evidence support a case under Section 5(4)(a).

The opposition therefore failed on all the ground on which it had been brought.

Full decision O/065/07 PDF document182Kb