1 1
`
`V111):
`
`A
`
`1
`
`IN THEJUNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL IQSOARD
`------------------------—:i---————-—_—-—;L——————-—-A_2.¢_—Q—--—-X
`
`'
`
`»
`
`—
`
`.
`
`NOVARTIS INTERNATIONALE; ;
`PHARMACEUTICAL, LTD.,
`
`‘
`
`A
`
`'
`
`‘
`
`‘ fig
`
`-
`
`-5;
`A-I7
`
`fr‘ i: .
`3'?
`" ‘~.« 23-.
`
`i§Opposer,,
`
`_
`
`£45.
`
`Opposition No. 124,457
`
`Y.
`
`»
`
`‘C
`
`.-_-3
`
`GENETIC IMMUNITY; LLC,
`
`:;App1icanI.
`
`"""""""""""""""""""'—'f------"-----E"‘-"éfr'~}--'-----EX
`
`OPPOS13R'S BRIEF
`=
`PURSUANT T0
`»
`TRADEMARK RULE 2.128
`
`
`
`:
`
`_
`
`T
`
`g
`"'
`
`"'
`
`A
`
`’
`
`A
`
`E
`
`.3
`A
`:
`‘Peter S. Sloane
`OSTROLENK, FABER, GERB & SOFFEN, LLP
`- 491180 Avenue of the Am:-:ri!cas
`‘-
`;
`;New York, New York 10036
`T Tel. (212) 382-0700
`
`Attorneys for Opposer
`
`“
`
`A:
`“
`
`Lo
`O’)
`CT‘
`
`fl .,
`
`1
`
`L;
`
`
`
`n
`
`»v..‘;
`
`

`
`
`
`1.
`11.
`
`I11.
`
`I
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`.
`.
`.
`.
`. 3. .
`.
`.
`INTRODUCTION AND-:S»TATEMENT OF THE ISSUES .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.1.
`.
`STATEMENTOE THE RECORD .
`.
`. y. .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`A.
`.
`A.
`Opposer’sVRecordgldvidence .
`.
`.
`.< .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.p
`.
`B.
`Applicant’-s Recor;:Evidence, .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`..
`.
`.
`. .’.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`. ..]...f'.
`.
`STATEMENTZOF THE .. .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`. ..'
`.
`.
`.
`.
`A.
`Opposer and its Well-Known
`Branded Anti.virals
`.
`.
`.
`.15.
`
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`f
`.'
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`,
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`. 1
`.
`. 1
`.
`. 1
`.
`. 7
`.
`. .7
`.
`. 7
`
`. .7
`.
`.
`. .9
`.
`.
`. 10
`.
`.
`. ..1o
`.
`.
`. 10 1
`.
`.
`. 12
`
`. 12
`.
`.
`. 13
`.
`.
`. ..13
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`5.
`6.
`
`.
`.
`. ...
`.
`.
`.
`‘ The Traderrliark DENAVIR : .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`The
`Product .:.; .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`Channels of‘Distributio_n
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`DENAyTR:S..a1es_.p..‘...;p .
`.
`.
`]p3E1ip\~1AVIRiAd\/‘ertising and Promotion .
`Awareness otthe
`Brand .
`.
`.
`
`1
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`. ...
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.1.’.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`..
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`The_Market DENAVIR*‘ .; .
`7.
`Applicant and its neiiv DERMAVll{ Intent-to-Use Applicatiori
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`.1.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.l .
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`. 4.
`.
`
`A
`
`IV.
`
`B.
`
`A.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 13
`
`Priorityis Not an Issiie since the Mark DENAVIR was Registered
`and Used Long Before Applicant’srFiling Date for its
`Intent-to.-Uste Application of themark DERMAVIR .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`B.
`
`The Concurrent Use gfthegmarks DENAVTR and DERMAVIR
`is Likely to Cause Confi1sion .
`.
`.
`.
`.* .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`l.
`l
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 14
`
`(1)
`
`OppOser's Mark DENAVIR is a
`Strong Mark Entitled
`to a Broad Scope of Protection .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`(a)
`
`A DENAVIR is an Inherently Distinctive Mark .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 15
`
`. 15
`
`

`
`
`
`'
`
`,
`
`(b)’ *‘DENAVIR has Acquired Distinctiveness .
`
`—;_(i)
`
`Opposer’s:Ii)irect Evidence .
`
`.
`
`.' .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`1
`
`.' .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Z
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 16
`
`. 16
`
`. 17
`
`(ii)
`
`Opposer’slndirect Evidence .
`
`.
`
`(a);
`
`1
`
`(b):
`‘
`
`i—-
`
`ii‘
`
`. Opp9ser’s Long Use and Substantial Sales
`p underthe mark DENAVIR .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.p
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 17
`
`’
`
`* Opposer’s Significant Advertising and
`a Promotion under the mark DENAVIR .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 17
`
`(2)
`
`;Opposer‘s and App1icant’sf_Trademarks
`DENAVIR and DERMAVIR are Virtually
`Identical in §ight,iConnotation and Sound .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`I.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Ti(a)i
`
`"The Marks are_—Almost Indistinguishable in Sight
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. : .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 19
`
`. 19
`
`. 19
`
`(b) .—
`
`:The 1:3/larks Shareithe Same Connotation .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. .3 .
`.
`.
`,
`.
`.
`i
`.
`(c) A Thelil/larksiSoundAlike
`and DERMAVIR
`The'Parties’ %Respective
`Marks will be Appliedito Closely Related Goods .
`.
`.
`
`3
`
`.
`
`DERMAVIR will Travel inithe Same
`DENAVIR
`Channels of Tradeito the Same Users and Purchasers A
`A and will be Administered in the Same Manner .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`H
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. ..21
`‘
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 22
`
`. 26
`
`(3)
`
`(4)
`
`(a)
`.
`
`.
`
`A The Pgharmaceuticals will be Prescribed by the
`A
`SameéDoctors and Filled by the Same Phannaqists .
`
`p
`.' .
`
`.
`
`'1 The Medication will be Used by the Same Purchasers: .
`
`(c) —
`
`, The lérugs willibe Administered in the Same or
`Sirnil{1rManner’
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.y .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`The Board has. held that Different Types
`i
`of Phannaceutical Products are Related
`for the Purpose of Establishing Likelihood of Confusion .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`I
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`The Nature of Pharmaceutical Products Requires a Highly
`Stringent Application of the Likelihood of Confusion Standard .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 27
`
`. 28
`
`. 30
`
`. 31
`
`. 32
`
`(5)
`
`(6)
`
`-ii-
`
`j
`
`

`
`
`
`(7) The Lowf:)iscri1r1inéiti'on ofthe Purchasers and Users
`,1 Lof Opposer's Produét is Not:Suff1cient1y A i
`'
`' High to Prevent a Likelihood of Confusion .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. ..34
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. ..36
`
`. ..37
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`(8)
`
`,
`
`*~Applicant'—§e Filing ofits Intent-to—Use Application
`ofDERM1§VIR iwasiwith Knowledge
`_
`V
`_ E of Opposefs Prior Conflicting DENAVIR
`1 Mark and iii Derogation of the Newcomer Rule .
`
`'.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`V.
`
`CONCLUSION ....
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`‘i71I7‘1‘
`
`1\-
`
`
`
`1:*‘4U‘(1l‘4
`
`00607135 .1
`
`-iii-'
`
`

`
` {
`
`.;TABLE 1013 AUTHORITIES 1
`
`FEDERAL CASES
`
`I
`
`American Home Products Corp. 1Z.:USVPharmaceutical Corp.,
`190U.S.P.Q. 357 (T.T.A.B. 1976,) ... .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`»
`1
`. ..=.....1.... .
`
`American Rice, Inc. v.lHLTACor:§I, 231 U.S.P.Q. 793 (T.T.A.B. 1986)
`
`Aveda Corp. v. Evita Marketing, Inc, 706
`12 U.S.P.Q.2d 1091 (D. Minn. 1998)
`.
`.
`.
`
`éupp. C1419,
`. . .
`.
`. .; .
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.1
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`é
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.-
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`..
`. .._.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`“
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 20,31, 35
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. .37
`
`. . .
`
`.
`
`. 16
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 32, 33
`
`Laboratories, Inc.,
`Blansett Pharmacal Co.
`25 U.S.P.Q.2d 1473 (T.T.A.B. 19292)
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Broolgfeld Communications, Inc. West CoastVEntertainment Corp,
`174 F.3d 1036, 50 U.S:P.Q.2d (9th Cir. 1999) ..A.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`. . .
`
`Canadian Imperial BanklofComm%e’rce v. Wells Fargo Bank,' NA.,
`811 F.2d 1490, 1 U.S.P.Q.'2d 1813§('Fed. Cir. 1987) .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`'
`.
`
`-
`.1.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`i
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`9
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. .35
`
`:
`. 22
`
`.
`
`. 22, 23, 26
`
`CBS Inc. v. Morrow, 708"F.2d 157:9, 2l1'8.U.S.1?.d. 198 (Fed. Cir. 1983) .
`
`.
`
`Century 21 Real Estate:-Corp. v. Ce§ntury'Lij’e ofAmerica,
`970 F.2d 874, 23 U.S.P.Q.2d 1698 (Fed. Cir:‘1.992),
`cert. denied, 506 U.S. ‘1034, 121 L.i:Ed. 2d 685, .113 S. Ct. 812 (1992)
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Clifton v. Plough, Inc.,-341: F.2d
`
`144 U.S.P.Q. 599 (C.C.P.A. 1965) .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`I
`
`.
`
`>
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Cole Chemical Company Cole Laboratories, Inc., et al.,
`101 U.S.P.Q. 44 (D.C.M.O. 1954) .
`.
`.
`.
`. . .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.' .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`I
`. . .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 37
`
`. 30
`
`. .32
`
`.
`
`. 21
`
`Crown Radio Corp. v. Soundscribeé ::C0rp.,
`
`U.S.P.Q. 221 (C.C.P.A. 1974)
`
`Dietene Company v. Dgéirin Ccmpfny, et al. ,i 106 U.S.P.Q. 344 (C.A.8; 1955) .
`Fisons Ltd. v. UAD Laboratories,—In'c., 219 U_iS.P_.lQ. 661 (T.T.A.B. 1983) .
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 5.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 32
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`{
`.
`. . . 20, 28, 31
`
`C0,, 265:F.2d_385,
`G.D. Searle & Co. v. Chas. Pfizer
`121 U.S.P.Q. 74 (7th Cir. 1959), cert. denied,
`9
`361 U.S. 819, 4 L. Ed. 2d 65, 80 S.Ct64,123 U.S.P.Q. 590 (1959) .
`.
`3
`
`C
`
`Geigy Chemical Corp. v. Atlas Chemical Industries, Inc.,
`438 F.2d 1005, 169 U.S.P.Q. 39 (C.C.P.A. 1971) ....’ .
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`I
`
`_
`.1
`‘
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. .21
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. .35
`
`ooso"/135.1
`
`-1V-
`
`

`
`
`
`7'“
`
`General Foods Corp. v. ITT Continental Bakin,§ C0.,
`196 U.S.P.Q. 189 (T.T.A.—B. 1977”), ...» .
`.
`.
`.
`. ..‘.
`.
`.
`.
`
`’
`. .. .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. . .
`
`Giant Food, Inc. v. Nation ’s /Food:.s‘ervice, Inc., 710 F.2d 1565,
`218 U.S.P.Q. 390 (Fed Cir. 1i983)1'—.
`.
`.
`L
`:_
`.
`.— .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`. ..' .
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`1
`
`‘
`.
`
`,*
`.
`
`»
`
`.
`. . .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`*
`..::f .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 17
`
`. 18, 38
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 32
`
`4
`Glenwood Laboratories, II’lC:«V. Arnerican Horne (Products Corp.
`455 F.2d 1384, 173 U.S.P.Q._19_((;,C.P.A. 1972) .
`.'
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`. ..... .
`
`Hancock v. AmericanIS'tee_l &
`97 U.S.P.Q. 330 (C.C.P.A; 1953) “I;
`
`Co., 203 F.2d 737,
`.
`.6
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.,. .
`.. .
`.
`
`_
`
`.
`
`. ..I.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.’_.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`M
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`-
`. .. .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`if
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`;
`
`. 19
`
`. 18
`
`Health Net v. USA Healthnet, Inc. U,8.P.Q.2d 1187 (C.D.Ca1.‘ 1993)
`
`Helene Curtis Industries Inc. v. Suave Shoe Corp.,
`13 U.S.P.Q.2d 1618 ('1".T.A.B:. 1989) * .
`.
`.
`. . .. .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`_
`._ .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`1
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 16
`
`. 19
`
`Chemical Corp.,
`Hercules, Inc. v. National Starch
`223 U.S.P.Q. 1244 (T.T.A.B. 19842, .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.’ .
`.
`
`.
`
`Hoflman-La Roche Inc,,v. Knoll Pliarmaceutical C0,,
`167 U.S.P.Q. 183 (T.T.A.B. 1970)”? .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`. .;
`,5.‘ .
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.« .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. .. .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`-
`.
`
`,
`.x
`
`.
`.3 .
`
`.
`.. .
`
`.1 .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`,
`
`>
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 21, 31
`
`.
`
`.
`
`23
`
`In re Continental Graphics:,Corp.,
`
`U.S.P.Q..2d:1375 (T."FA.B. 1999) .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`In Re E.I. Du Pont de Ivemenrs & éoy,~476 F.2d 1357
`177 U.S.P.Q. 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973):’;é”:.— .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. .'.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`v
`.2.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 14
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 31, 33
`
`A ‘
`.
`.
`In Re Merck & Co., Inc.;
`189 U.S.P.Q. 355 (T.T.A.B_. 1976). .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`In re Mucky Duck Mustcird:Co. Inc.i,§6 U.S.P.Q.i2d 1467 (T.T.A.B. 1988) .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`I.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`J 25 _
`
`. 25
`
`In re Opus one, Inc., 60U:S.P.Q.2d:_=,,1812i(T.T.1A.13. 2001) .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 6.9.
`
`In re Perry Manufacturing Co., 121I.:S.P.Q.2d 1751 (T.T.A.B. 1989) .
`
`In re Total Quality Group Inc.,’—51 U%S.P.Q.2d 1474 ('1“.T.A.B. 1999) .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.1
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.:’.
`
`.
`
`'
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. .28
`
`.
`
`. 25
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. .20
`
`Kenner Parker Toys, Inc. v. Rose Ari Industries, Inc., 963 F.2d 350,
`22 U.S.P.Q.2d 1453 (Fed. Cir. 1992), cert. denied, ‘
`506 U.S. 862, 121 L.Ed. 2d 126, 113iS.Ct. 181 (1992) .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`=‘
`. ..' .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Kimberly—Clark Corp. v. H. DouglasEnterprises, Ltd,
`774 F.2d 1144, 227 U.S.P.Q. 541 (Fed. Cir. 1985) .
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. ..
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`'
`.‘ .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 18
`
`00507135 .1
`
`~
`
`5
`
`-V-
`
`

`
`
`
`King Candy Co. v. Eunice King's 1:(itchen, 1176.,
`496 F.2d 1400, 182 U.S.P.Q. 108,(;1C.C.P.A.71974) .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`..
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`,
`
`,
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. . .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`..
`. .. .
`
`4
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 14
`
`. .36
`
`Kotabs, Inc. v. Kotex Co.,‘5O F.2d 58110 (3rd Cir. 1931), cert. denied,
`284 U.S. 665, 76 L. Ed. 563, 52 siéct. 41 (1931), .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`. .;.
`
`_U.S.P.Q.2d 1895 (T.T.A.B. 19.89)
`McDonald's Corp. v. McKinley,
`McNeil Laboratories, I_nc_. v. Wynn: Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
`155 U.S.P.Q. 736 (T.T._A.B. 1967)?’.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`;
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`I
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 19
`
`. .31
`
`. .33
`
`Morganstern Chemical Company,—Inc. v.
`116 U.S.P.Q. 480 (C.A-.3 1958) ..
`.
`.
`.
`
`Searle
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Company,
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.1.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. ..,.
`
`Neville Chemical Co.
`
`Iiubrizol C%orp., 196iU.S.P.Q. 756 (T.T.A.B. 1977)
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. ..' .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.6 .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 14
`
`Octocom Systems, Inc. 1». Houston'.-Computerfihervices, Inc.,
`918 F.2d 937, 16 U.S.P:Q.2d 1783=,_(Fed. Cir. 1990) .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`_
`L
`15, 21, 22,24, 25, 28, 30
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 34, 35
`
`Penguin Book Ltd. v. Eberhard, 489_U.S.P.Q.2d 1280 (T.T.A.B. 1998)
`
`Plough, Inc. v. Clifton, 138 U.S.P.Q. 515 (T.T.A.B. 1963),
`afi”d., 341 F.2d 934,144 U.S.P.Q. 599 .
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`. .,.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`. , .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`7
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`,
`
`._
`
`,
`
`.
`
`.'
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`,
`.‘ .
`
`._
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. .:.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 32, 33
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 27
`
`Saab-Scania Aktiebolag v. _Sparkorrlatic Corp.,
`26 U.S.P.Q.2d 1709 (T.T.A.B. 1993)
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Specialty Brands, Inc. v. Coflee Bean Distributors, Inc.,
`748 F.2d 669, 223 U.S.P.Q. 1281 (lied. Cir. 1984)” .
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`=
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`,
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 34, 36
`
`State Historical Soc. v.:Rin;gling Brbs. Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc.,
`190 U.S.P.Q. 25 (T.T.A.B.71976)
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`. .‘.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`Sterling Drug Inc. v. Knoll<A.-G. Chemische Fabriken,
`159 U.S.P.Q. 628 (T.T.A.B_. 1968)
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`'.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`_
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`5
`
`2
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. .37
`
`.
`
`. 31
`
`.
`
`. ..37
`
`TBC Corp. v. Holsa, Inc, 1'26‘F.3d.5:147o,
`44 U.S.P.Q.2d 1315 (Fed. Cir. 1997;). .
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. .,.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 15
`
`University ofNotre Dame du lac v. C. Gourmet Food Imports Co. ,
`213 U.S.P.Q. 594 (T.T.A.B. 1982), 703 F.2d 1732, afl’d.,
`217 U.S.P.Q. 505 (Fed. Cir. 1983) .‘.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Walgreen Co. v. Knoll Pharmaceutical Co.,
`162 U.S.P.Q. 609 (T.T.A.B. 1969)
`L.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.' .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`{
`,
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. 31
`
`00607135.].
`
`A
`
`-Vi-
`
`

`
`
`
`FEDERAL STATUTES
`
`-
`
`LanhamAct, 15 U.s:.ic.§1O52(iif‘)‘ .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`TREATISES
`
`,
`
`‘
`
`13,14,32
`
`.
`11:5 .
`McCarthy on Trademark; and Uéfair Competition, J. Thomas McCarthy,
`McCarthy on Trademarks and Urifair Competitiong J. Thomas McCarthy, §e 25:52’ .
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`.
`
`.
`I.
`
`.
`.
`
`. 16
`. 18
`
`-:41:
`
`
`
`
`
`4;-,m~.x:m:-vmr
`
`.‘‘l.'1£"
`
`00607135 .1
`
`-Vii-
`
`

`
` .,.-rm.-f... .~.;.~ «.,._.:..»«.:~.. 3.; _,w , ~~ an,..s;.:,:..«....,,.W,a....c......,.W.u.,.......,,........W,,,m.my.. -.3...“ ,~..,.«m..«.m. JI‘\«\, »» _.,M.,,,.mW..a..,...~.,.,...,.,.M,,..m,,M,,M ~6(fik\‘<<'4A1lIvv.\‘> ,, ...., _
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.
`
`INTRODUCTTOISI AND STATEMENT or THE ISSUES
`
`Opposer, Novartisilifliitemational Pharmaceutical, Ltd., herebytsubmits its main brief
`'
`-
`=2
`..
`.
`
`on the case pursuant to TrademarkRule 2.128., Opposer is the owner ofcommon law and registered
`rights in and to the trademark; as and registered for antivirals and preparations for
`the treatment ofcold sores and reliifed skincdisorders.
`The issuebefore
`Board ‘this proceeding is whether there is a likelihood of
`COI1filSlOll under Section 2(d) of
`Lanhani Act, 15 U.S.C:. § l0,52(d), betiween Opposer’s prior
`
`registration and use ofthe mark DENAVIR for antivirals andipreparations for the treatment ofcold
`,
`.3“
`sores and related skin disorders and Applican-t’s application Serial No. 78/052,908 for the mark
`
`7 DERMAVIR for vaccines and Vaceine adjuvants. It is respectfiillysubmitteid that the evidentiary
`
`record and the arguments presented herein demonstrate that there is a very strong likelihood of
`
`confusion from Applicantés application Serial No. 78/052,908, and, therefore, a final judgment
`
`should be entered in favor of Opifoser and:-registration of Applicant’s application Serial No.
`
`78/052,908 should be denied.
`
`I1.
`
`A.
`
`A.
`
`Opposer’s Record Exiiidence
`
`Opposer’s evidentiary recordgin this opposition proceeding consists ofthe following:
`
`the tnalftiestimonyj deposition of Jennifer Stuart (hereinafter referred to
`The transcript
`as the “Stuart Tr.”) taken on: September 25, 2002, filed by Opposer during its testimony
`period on October 11, 2002,—:_along. with the following Exhibits 1 - 35 (hereinafter referred
`to as “Stuart Ex.”) offered atssaid trial testimony depositionzi‘
`
`Pages 47 to 98 of the Stuart Tr. and Stuart Exs. 12 to 27 are designated as
`1
`“confidential” pursuant to the Order ‘of the Board dated September 13, 2002. Also pursuant to
`the Order, during its trial; testimony period, Opposer filed the confidential portions of the
`transcript (hereinafter referred to as ‘fStuart Confidential Tr.”) and the confidential exhibits
`(hereinafter referred to as “Stuart Confidential Ex.”) separately under seal with the Clerk of the
`iI
`Il
`i
`
`,
`
`1
`
`O0607l3S.1
`
`

`
`
`
`Amended Notice of:Taking ofTestimony Deposition .
`
`DENAYIR prescribing information material ’
`
`*
`
`:I
`
`Photocopy of packaging of DENA:\/1R penciclovir cream
`
`Printouts ofIntemet:web site ‘at www.denavir.com
`
`Deed of Assignment transferring the trademark DENAVIR from SmithKline
`Beecham Corporation to Novartisglnternational Pharmaceutical Ltd. ,
`
`Representative docuriients transferred from SmithKline to Novartis including original
`packaging for DENALVIR ‘
`
`Photocopy ofnew packaging for
`
`updated in 1999 with new graphics
`
`Photocopy of currentgpackagingiofDENAVIR penciclovir cream
`
`Direct pieces £5“: DENAV-JR sent. to consumers
`
`10
`
`ll
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`Storyboard of national television advertisement for DENAVIR “40 Million Faces”
`campaign run from 1999 through 2001
`
`Business reply cards for DENAVIR distributed to physicians ‘
`V
`
`\
`
`Study entitled "Cold Sore Medication Study Among-Pharmacists" dated May 2002
`Q.
`[confidential]
`
`Primary Care Physician (PCP) Study [Confidential]
`
`Study entitled "ColdiSoregMedication Study Among Dentists" dated April 2002
`[Confidential]
`
`Study entitled “Cold Sore Medication Study Among Derrnatologists?’ dated April
`7
`S
`.
`i
`..
`2002 [Confidential]
`
`Excel spreadsheet suriimafizingfactorysales forDENAVIR for 9000, 2001 and 2002
`[Confidential]
`E.
`
`Board. The following brief is a redacted version excised of certain confidential material such as
`advertising and sales figures. Opposer maintains its claim of confidentiality with respect to all
`underlying testimony and materials designated as confidential such as the yearly breakdown of
`sales revenue and advertising expenditures. Opposer has concurrently filed an unredacted
`version of this brief under seal with the Clerk of the Board.
`
`0O607135.l
`
`2
`
`

`
`
`
`mu
`
`Profit and lessfstateinent: for DENAVIR for 2000, ;2001, 032002 and 2003
`[Confidential]
`-
`e
`‘
`1
`‘rt
`
`Summary ofnumbjer ofprescriptions written for DENAVIR by month for each year
`from 1997 thion]gn;]2003 [Confidential]
`'
`
`Reporttrdm the méarket research firm [MS monitoring the n'umber;ofprescriptions
`written “for DENAVJR in 2000, 2001 and 2002 [Confidential]
`
`Documentereflectirig historical shipments ofDENAVIR in uiiits from 1996 through
`August ofs2002
`estimates for the remainder of 2002 and 2003i[Confidential]
`
`Document with data from Competitive Media Reporting reflecting advertising
`spending‘ for DENAVIR in 1998 through 2002 [Confidential]
`‘
`
`Competitive Media l{epo_rting brealging down advertising
`Report: prepared
`spending into component partsiforbrands including DENAVIR in 2000 and the first
`half of 2001 [Confidential]
`:
`3
`A
`‘
`
`Document reflecting amount ofspending in professional journals for brands in the
`cold sore categoryincluding DENAVIR in 2000 [Confidential]
`'3
`
`2000print advertising plan for DENAVIR [Confidential]
`
`Documentlisting specific professionaljournals in which DEILIAVIR was advertised
`in 2000,. [Confidential]
`V
`C
`0‘
`
`copies bfrhedia pléflnifor DENAVIR for 2000, 2001 and 2002 [Confidential]
`
`Documentisummari-“Zing number ofcalls to the DENAVIR toll-free telephone number
`in 2000, 2001 and 2002 [Confidential]
`~
`0
`’
`Drafi ofidetail [aid
`DENAVIR intended in} distribution to ‘dentists
`Detail aid for DENAVIRidistributed to physicians
`3
`Detail aid for DEN1:§iV]RTdistfibuted to physicians
`Consumer advertisernent for DEl\vI;A\/IR
`a
`Detail aid for
`distributed to physicians
`Print advertisement DENAVIR from E§c_>pl_e_ magazine in 2001
`
`Detail aid for DENAVIR distributed to physicians
`
`i
`
`17
`
`18
`
`20
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`32
`
`33
`
`34
`
`00607135 . 1
`
`3
`
`

`
`
`
`35
`
`Patient education brochme for DENAVIR
`
`B.
`
`Reliaiiceiwith Exhibits A-K, filed during Opp'oser's trial testimony
`Opposer’s Notice
`period on October '1 1, 2002,~and consisting of:
`i
`1
`A
`
`I Certified copies ofthe following registrations, dated August 20, 2002, showing both
`A.
`the current status of and current title to the follovving of Opposer’s_ U.S. Trademark’ Registrations:
`
`,:No.ii2,139,7i89, registered .February 221, 1998, of the mark DENAVIR for
`(1 )
`“preparations for the treatment of cold sores and related skin disorders” in Class 5;
`
`~-—No.e2,l.39,703, registered February 24, 1998, of the mark DENAVIR for
`(2)
`“pharmaceutical prepar_a_tions,:nam:ely, ar'1tiVirals”’ in Class 5;:
`‘
`5
`
`No:I.i2,148,32-,5, registered March 31, 1998, of-the mark DENAVIR (Stylized)
`(3)
`for “pharmaceutical preparations, namely, antivirals” in Class 5;
`‘
`
`- No. 2,145,4i8:, registeredMarch 17, 1998, ofthe mark DENAVIR and Design
`(4)
`for “pharmaceutical preparations, rfamely, antivirals” in Class 5;
`V
`
`No. '2,47s,49,1, registered August 14, 2001-, of the ‘mark DENAVIR and
`(5)
`Design for “pharmaceutical preparations, namely, antiviral preparations and preparations for the ’
`treatment of cold sores andrelated
`disorders” in Class 5; and
`
`No. 2,488,7lԤi7, registered September 11, 2001, of the mark DENAVIR and
`(6)
`Design for “pharrnaceutical preparations, namely, antiviral preparations andpreparations for the
`treatment of cold soresiandrelated skin disorders’l in Class 5.
`
`B.
`
`Copies of the following of Opposer’s pending :U.S. trademark ‘applications:
`
`NV:o.'75/607,956, filed December 18, 1998, ofthe rriarkMg\KE COLD SORES
`(1)
`DISAPPEAR WITH ANTI-VIRA.LeDENAVIR, for “antivirals; cold sore medication?’ in Class 5;
`
`No. 75/6o7i,9§5, filed December 18, 1998, ofthe mark rigs TINGLE IS THE
`(2)
`SIGNAL. THE SIGNALFOR DENAVIR for “antiVira1s; cold soreiimedication” in Class 5; and
`
`No. 75/506,022, filed June 22, 1998, ofthe mark DENAVIR -for “healthcare
`(3)
`information services rendered via aiglobal computer information network" in ,Class 42.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Advertisement of DENAVIR from January 14, 2002 edition of People magazine.
`
`Advertisement of DENAVIR from January 28, 2002 edition ofiPeop1e magazine.
`
`Printouts ofthe follovving domain name registrations from VeriSign’s records in the
`E.
`“whois” section of www.netsol.comf
`‘
`
`I1
`
`ooso7135.1
`
`9
`
`4 .
`
`‘
`
`

`
`
`
`(1)
`
`(2)
`
`Domain narne registrationiof DENAVIRCOM;
`
`., ‘Domain
`
`registration of COLDSORESOURCEiCOM‘i';:
`
`Printouts from the Trademark Electronic Search System (TES-S) ofthe United States
`F.
`Patent and Trademark Officeof the following third party registrations:
`
`RegistiationNo. 2,570,951 ofthemarkl’ PERREL and Design covering,
`,
`.
`(1)
`among other things, “antivirals” and “vaccines” in Class 5;
`I
`3
`
`A U.S. RegistrationNo. 2,592,415 ofthe mark POWDERJECT covering, among
`‘
`(2)
`other things, “antivirals” and “vacgines” in Class 5;
`~
`
`Registration No. 2,574,842 ofthe mark NO
`(3)
`covering, among otherthings, “antivira1s” and “vaccines” in Class 5;
`
`'
`
`v
`
`PARTICLE,
`
`A US. Registri_ationNo. 2,558,796 of the mark POWDERCAINE covering,
`(4)
`among other things, “antiviral_s” and “vaccines” in Class 5;
`r
`
`Registriation No.‘2,37,6,430 of the mark TRIP covering, among other
`(5)
`things, “antivirals’_’ andi“vaccines”t‘¥in Class 5; and
`I
`'
`4
`
`— U.S. Registration No.i1,986,521 ofthe mark LAKINIER coivering, among
`(6)
`other things, “antiviralsg” and “vaccines” in Class "5.
`
`Printouts of the following printed publications, obtained from the LexisNexis
`G.
`computer database, located’ at wWw;_.lexis.com:
`I
`i
`
`An article titlied “INFLUENZA: Flu shot benefits outvsieigh costs in healthy
`(1)
`young adults”, dated September 1842002, from Vaccine Weekl
`;
`
`An article titled “CHRONIC HEPATITIS B: Combination of vaccine and
`(2)
`antiviral fractures immune tolerance in virus model”, dated June 12, 2002, from Vaccine Weekly;
`
`Anantio1’e titl:efd“HIV/Al]DS1VACCI1\IE:Antibodygenesfrompatients induce
`(3)
`broad antiviral activity”, dated ‘August 29, 2002, from Gene Therapy Weekly:
`*
`
`An article titled “SMALLPOX:_Acambis Gets Second Vaccine Contract”,
`(4)
`dated December 30, 2001 - January
`2002, from Medical Letter on the CDC: and FDA;
`
`An article titled “EPIDEMIOLOGY: HIV-Like Virus Detected in Wild
`(5)
`Chimpanzee”, dated February 4, 2002, from AIDS Weekly;
`
`An article titled “Vira1 Library May Aid Vaccine D_evelopinent”, dated
`(6)
`February 18, 2002, from AIDS Weekly;
`
`ooso713s.1
`
`5
`
`,
`
`

`
` V;
`,,,,»,;,,,:.-_:.t.r..:,,..~.r~.»i-i~.r,
`.
`.M:.,.-.:;...., _:~.............»ew,,»...e...,a.c....,,,e;t:t:m:-»,
`..e.,... M,
`.,..a.:.
`Vw/l>\
`., .
`.».:v «.
`»t
`A‘.
`A4
`..,»,,
`UV/V4
`_
`5A»IAA
`x-V»
`in
`II/\yȤ \
`\)~~r
`..
`'I',"'l5
`
`P. Anarticle titled “HIV/AIDS VACCINE: gag—based DNA vaccine effective
`(7)
`in primates”, dated October 2, 2002', from Vaccine Weekly;
`:
`
`' An article titled “ROTAVIRUS: Molecular ‘motor’ drives virus replication”,
`(8)
`dated July 23, 2002, from »-TB & Outbreaks Week;
`I
`I
`
`, Aniiarticle titled “HERPES SIMPLEX: Research supporting use of HSV
`(9)
`animal model published”, dated Jline 19, 2002, from Vaccine Weekly;
`'
`E
`
`— An article titled “AIDS PREVENTION: Chicago researchers testing HIV
`(10)
`vaccine for healthy people”, dated _June 6, 2002, from Gene Therapy Weekly;
`‘
`
`article titled ‘-‘HEMORRI-IAGIC FEVER: Biodefense working group
`(11)
`releases recommendaticnsfor biological attackf’, dated May 28, 2002, from TB & Outbreaks Week;
`
`9 An article titied “HEPATITIS B THERAPY: Vaccine and drug combination
`(12)
`eliminate viral DNA in some patient;s_with HBV”, dated May 8, 2002, from Irnmunotliera Weekl
`;
`
`' article ititled’ “AVENTIS PASTEUR: Multiantigen vaccine with
`(13)
`recombinant gp160 effective in newly infected patients”, dated March 6, 2002, from Biotech Week;
`
`(14) An article titled “NOVAVAX TO REPORT SECOND QUARTER 2002 2
`FINANCIAL REsULTs ON MONDAY, AUGUST 12, 2002", dated Augiist 6, 2002, from PR
`Newswire (US 1;
`‘I
`
`~ Anlarticle titled “V‘IROL:OiGIC ANNOUNCES SECOND Q CARTER 2002
`(15)
` ’_’, dat_ed'August 1, 2002, from PR Newswire US ;
`C’
`
`(16) An-article titied “BOSTON:BIOMEDICA AWARDED NIH GRANT FOR
`DEVELOPMENT OF A NOVEL COLLECTION/PROC-ESSING‘ METHOD FOR
`TUBERCULOSIS SAMPLESAUSING PRESSURE CYCLING TECHNOLOGY (PCT)”, dated July
`31, 2002, fiom PR Newswire (US 1;;
`
`1 An article titled “OTC BULLETIN BOARD SYMBOL:
`(17)
`18, 2002, from CCN Newswire;
`
`dated July
`
`(18) An article (titled “TRINITY MEDICAL GROUP USA ANNOUNCES
`AMENDMENT OF REMUNE(R)j SUPPLY CONTRACTS”, dated June :28, 2002, from T3
`Newswire (US 1;
`I
`*
`.
`
`(19) An article titled “DRUGS GIANT IN NEW MERGERiTALKS; MERGER
`HOPES FOR DRUG GIANT”, dated July 17, 1994, from Mail on Sunda London ;
`
`(20) An article titled “STUDY SEEKS COLD—SORE SUFFERERS”, dated
`November 15, 1994, from The Roanoke Times & World News;
`'
`
`00607135.].
`
`I
`
`‘«
`
`6 1,
`
`k
`
`

`
`
`
`:3.
`:g;-
`
`articleititled “‘l_J’ ‘center has plans to lead antivirial research; Lab to target
`(21) 7
`mystery bugs”, dated November-E10, 1995,from Star Tribune gMinneapoli:s, M N 1; and
`(22)
`aiticleitiitled “Clinic is ‘oasis’: Calgarydentist speciializesiin treating AIDS,
`cancer patients”, dated August 2?}, 1992, from The Record {Kitchener-Wa'|ter1oo)3.
`
`H.
`Dictionary definitions of thewords “antiviral” and “Vaccine” from The American
`Herita e Diction
`-ofthe En
`Lan
`a e, Third Edition.
`I.
`Excerpts _,/from Mi%crobiology,:‘Fundainentals and Applications, by Robert M. Atlas
`T
`-
`2 .
`‘
`-
`
`(1984).
`
`Definition of the letter string“‘vir” from the 2002 USP Dictionag of USAN and
`J.
`lntemational Dru Names.
`EV
`i
`
`Copies of Opposet’s First Set of~Discovery Requests to Applicant, Interrogatories
`K.
`Nos. 1, 3, 9 and l3"aiid Requestsifor Admission Nos. 12 and 13', and Applicant’s replies thereto
`contained in The App1icant’s Response to Opposer’s First Set of Discovery‘ Requests.
`B.
`Applicanfs Record Evideiiee
`" '
`i
`
`Applicant failed tofake anytestimonyduring its trial period. Applicant has filed only
`
`a Notice of Reliance with copiesiof various articles, patents,,web pages, trademarks, discovery
`1
`
`requests and responses:
`
`I11.
`
`‘
`1
`_
`STATEMENT OFTHE FACTS
`O oser_ and its Weiili-I<ilnowniDENAVIR Branded Antivirals
`
`A.
`
`'
`
`1.
`
`The Trademar—k’DENAVIR
`
`'
`
`Opposer:.is_ a leading .worldwide manufacturer and marketer tof a vvide variety of
`1
`.
`pharmaceutical products (Notice OT Opposition at 1]» 1). Opposerowns the following trademark
`registrations for DENAVIR on the E;-rincipal Registerin the United States Patient and Trademark
`11
`1
`
`l
`
`1.
`
`l 1z
`
`I
`3
`
`l
`
`oo5o713s.1
`
`7
`
`

`
`
`
`H
`
`Office, as well as common, law iérights in, andtto the trademark DENAVIR, foir antivirals and
`
`preparations for thetreatrinenjt of
`
`sores and related skin disorders:
`
`Reg‘; “No.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Goods
`
`’
`
`-,
`
`Pharmaceutical, preparations; namely,
`antivirals
`
`il
`
`Preparations for the treatment of cold
`sores and relatekl skin disorders
`
`Pharmaceutical preparations, namely,
`antivirals
`"
`
`‘Pharmaceutical 'preparations, namely,
`antivirals’
`
`Pharmaceutical preparations; namely
`anti-viral
`pireparfations
`and
`preparations for‘ the treatment of cold
`sores and related‘ skin disorders
`
`.
`,
`L
`:
`.
`Pharmaceutical preparations; namely
`anti—viral
`p'reparlations
`and
`preparations forithe treatment of cold
`sores and related skin disorders
`
`Mark
`
`DENAVIR
`
`DENAVIR
`
`2,139,789
`v
`
`DENAVIR (Stylized) :
`
`,i2,14§,325:i
`
`DENAVIR & Design T
`
`2, 145,438
`
`DENAVIR & Design,
`
`2,47é$,491
`
`DENAVIR & Design _
`
`1
`
`_
`
`i2,4si3,717 *
`
`Opposerlsvregistratioins are all actiye, valid and currently subsisting. i*(Certified title
`
`and status copies of Opposer‘s regiétrations are attached to Opposer‘s Notice 'of Reliance at Ex. A,
`
`1-6).
`
`Opposeréaltso owns
`
`followingpendingtrademark applications in the United States
`l
`
`Patent and Trademark Officez“ ‘
`
`‘
`
`"
`
`Mark
`
`DENAVIR
`
`Serial No.
`
`75/506,072
`
`OO607135.l
`
`Goods/Services j
`
`Healthcare
`
`information
`
`services
`
`a global
`rendered via
`information network
`
`computer
`
`

`
`
`
`V V. “:7.” =::
`; i 1: 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MAKE COLD SORES
`_ _
`DISAPPEAR WITH».
`ANTI-VIRAL DENAVIR 1
`THE TINGLE IS THI3 I
`SIGNAL. THE SIGNAL 9
`FOR DENAVIR
`-
`
`75‘:/607,956
`
`.
`
`_ Antivirals; cold sores medication
`
`75/_.607,955 _.
`
`A
`
`I
`
`.
`
`‘ Antivirals; cold sores medication
`'-
`
`‘
`
`I
`
`(Certified title andistatiijs copies:-viof Opposer'sI:applications are attached to Opp'oser's Notice of
`Reliance at Ex. B, 1-3;)’ s
`I A .
`I
`1
`I
`r
`A
`Opposer: obtainediits rights in the trademark DENAVIQ by assignment: from
`SmithKline-Beechamp Company (‘i?SmithKline’0:several years ago. (Stuart Tr. at 22-23, Stuart Ex.
`5). SmithKline had previously
`(using the trademark DENAVIR in the United States since
`December 1996. (Stuart at
`Stuart Ex. ‘6)I Indeed, the trademark (registrations assigned
`from SmithKline toOpposer claim=use ofthe word rnarkDENAVIIK in S. commerce since at least
`as early as December 1996. (Opp;:ser's Notice ofReliance at Ex. A).
`2.
`thetrademarkDENAVIR in connectionwiththe
`Opposerhas used currently
`manufacture and sale,ofpenciclovirgcremn, aprescription medication that shortens the duration and
`intensityofcold sores. (Stuart
`at?18-9, Stuart
`4 at DN 00004 (“Denavir® is a topical antiviral
`medication used for recurrent cold sores ..
`. on the lips and face in otherwiseihealthy adult
`
`‘ patients”)).
`
`Cold sores are caused~.by the virus herpes simplex type 1. ‘(Stuart Tr. at.11 1, Stuart Ex.
`
`4 at DN 00008). Penciclovir, the active: ingredient in Opposer’s DENAVIR medication, is an
`l
`
`antiviral agent that acts against the herpes virus. (Stuart Tr. at 9, Ex. 2 at DN 00443). Penciclovir
`.
`.
`‘
`attacks the herpes virus that causes cold sores and blocks the virus from replicating. (Stuart Tr. at
`9).
`
`l l
`
`n4
`
`co5o713s.1
`
`,
`
`=
`
`9
`
`

`
`
`
`,
`
`5
`
`2 (“Rx only”)
`is amediication available byprescriptiononly. (Stu:art
`and 4 at DN 00004 (“l_D;enavir® is Tavailable