`
`I_N_THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`COFINLUXE,
`
`72*%“Z“
`
`Opposer,
`
`V.
`
`ESTEE LAUDER INC.
`
`Applicant.
`
`:_::_.aI:an_aL__.n|_n%:¢_:n_aL__;
`
`Opposition No.
`
`NOTICE OF OPPOSITION
`
`Hon.
`Commissioner for Trademarks
`P.O. Box 1451
`VA 22313-1451
`
`Alexandria,
`
`Sir:
`
`In the matter of the application for registration of the
`
`trademark PURE POPS for cosmetics in class 3,
`
`Serial No.
`
`78/486,420,
`
`filed September 20,
`
`2004 by Estee Lauder Inc. and
`
`published for Opposition on August 9,
`
`2005; Cofinluxe, a
`
`French Company,
`
`(9
`having its principal place of business at rue
`
`Anatole de la Forge,
`
`75017, Paris, France, believes that it
`
`would be damaged by such registration and hereby opposes
`
`MMWfl47MNWN
`
`NMJON
`
`WWWWWWWMMW
`
`09-23-2005
`US. Patent & TMOfcITM Mail Rcpt Dt. #72
`
`
`
`823LPEOFFICESDENNISON,SCHUZOUGHERTY8:MACDONALDSéi1‘)27§NG
`
`STREET
`
`
`
`ALEXANDRlA:lRGINIA22314-2700
`
`7z§a37~96oo
`
`
`
`registration of said alleged trademark as it applies to the
`
`goods set forth therein.
`
`Opposer has obtained an extension of time through October
`
`8, 2005 in which to file this Notice of Opposition.
`
`As grounds for the opposition, it is alleged that:
`
`1. Applicant, Estee Lauder, Inc.,
`
`is on information and
`
`belief a corporation of the state of Delaware and has a
`
`business address at 767 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10153, and
`
`seeks to register the trademark PURE POPS for cosmetics in
`
`class 3, as set forth in the above noted application.
`
`The
`
`application was filed on September 20, 2004 based upon a claim
`
`of use of the mark since July 5, 2004 and use in commerce
`
`since August 1, 2004.
`
`The application was published on August
`
`9, 2005 in the Official Gazette of the United States Patent
`
`and Trademark Office.
`
`2. Opposer is well known throughout
`
`the world in the
`
`field of cosmetics, perfumery and similar beauty products and
`
`has and is presently engaged in the manufacture and marketing
`
`
`
`of its products in the United States as well as throughout
`
`the
`
`world.
`
`3. Opposer or its predecessors in interest have used
`
`their well—recognized trademarks POP PARFUM and POP ART on
`
`cosmetic goods and particularly fragrances for men and women
`
`in the United States marketplace and elsewhere.
`
`4. Opposer’s mark POP PARFUM is the subject of United
`
`States Trademark Registration No. 2,755,143, registered on
`
`August 26, 2003. This registration is in full force and
`
`effect.
`
`5. Opposer’s registration identified in Paragraph 4,
`
`supra, covers soaps for personal use; essential oils used in
`
`the manufacture of perfumery; perfume; toilet water; perfumed
`
`water; cosmetics, namely,
`
`lipsticks,
`
`lip pens, eye shadow,
`
`facial make up, mascaras, and tooth paste in Class 3.
`
`6. Opposer’s mark POP ART is the subject of United
`
`States Trademark Registration No. 2,883,518, registered on
`
`
`
`September 14, 2004. This registration covers soaps for
`
`personal use; essential oils used for manufacture of
`
`perfumery; perfume; toilet water; perfumed water; cosmetics,
`
`namely,
`
`lipsticks,
`
`lip pens, eye shadow, facial make up,
`
`mascaras, hair lotions, and tooth paste in Class 3.
`
`7. Applicant's mark is so similar to Opposer’s marks as
`
`to be likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception as to
`
`the source of the goods of the Applicant, especially since the
`
`Applicant's mark is intended to be used in conjunction with
`
`cosmetic products that are related to the goods of the
`
`Opposer.
`
`8.
`
`The marks here in issue are visually and phonetically
`
`similar,
`
`the applicant's mark incorporating Opposer’s famous
`
`“POP” brand.
`
`9.
`
`If the Applicant is permitted to use and register the
`
`mark herein opposed for the goods specified in it's
`
`application, confusion in the trade and for the consumer will
`
`likely result, causing damage and injury to the Opposer.
`
`
`
`Persons familiar with Opposer’s marks would be likely to
`
`purchase Applicant's products in the mistaken belief that such
`
`goods originate with the Opposer. Any such confusion will
`
`inevitably result in loss of sales to Opposer. Moreover, any
`
`objection or fault found with Applicant's cosmetics sold under
`
`the PURE POPS mark, herein opposed would necessarily reflect
`
`upon and seriously injure the reputation which Opposer has
`
`established for its products offered under its marks and
`
`thereby erode the valuable goodwill established by Opposer in
`
`its marks.
`
`10. Registration of the mark at issue herein to
`
`Applicant will be a source of damage and injury to Opposer.
`
`WHEREFORE, Opposer prays that Application Serial Number
`
`78/486,420 be rejected, and that registration of the mark
`
`shown therein for the goods set forth therein be refused and
`
`denied.
`
`
`
`
`
`A duplicate copy of this Notice of Opposition is
`
`enclosed.
`
`The fee of $300.00 required by the Trademark Rules
`
`of Practice, 2.6(a)(l7) is enclosed.
`
`September 23, 2005
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Donald L. Dennison
`Dennison, Schultz, Dougherty
`and Macdonald
`
`Attorneys for Opposer
`1727 King Street, Suite l05
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`(703)837-9600 Ext. 15
`Fax (703)837-0980