WARNING:  Provoke the alligators at your own risk!

In a recent decision before the U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, the University of Florida was successful in defeating a trademark application for the mark GATOR SHOP for online and retail store services.

In University Athletic Association v. Incentive Marketing, Inc., the Opposer (the University of Florida’s trademark holding entity), brought a notice of opposition against the Applicant, Incentive Marketing, claiming that Incentive’s application for the mark GATOR SHOP for “online retail store services featuring a wide variety of consumer goods of others; and retail shops featuring clothing, and a wide range of consumer goods for others,” was confusingly similar to Florida’s GATOR family of marks. In support of its claims, Opposer submitted twelve U.S. trademark registrations, all incorporating variations of its GATOR marks and designs for a wide variety of goods and services. In analyzing the merits, the Board noted that two key considerations in determining a likelihood of confusion is the similarity of the marks and the similarity of the goods or services to be offered under Applicant’s mark.  Here, the Board chose to isolate and compare Applicant’s GATOR SHOP mark with Opposer’s U.S. Trademark Registration No.122208 for the mark GATORS for the following goods and services:

  • entertainment services, namely conducting intercollegiate athletic events for others in International Class 41; and
  • retail store services, distributorship services and mail order services, in the field of wearing apparel and accessories, and novelty items and jewelry in International Class 42

In so doing, the Board observed that Opposer’s and Applicant’s retail store services were legally identical, particularly where, as here, neither of the parties’ identification of goods and services is restricted to a particular channel of trade or customers.  The Board went on to find the parties’ marks to be confusingly similar as well, given the dominant portion of both parties’ marks is “GATOR” and that Applicant’s inclusion of the term “shop” in its application did not do anything to alleviate potential confusion.  Therefore, to the TTAB, it was a relatively simple and straightforward case of likelihood of confusion and therefore the Opposition was sustained and registration denied.

It should be noted that the licensing of university trademarks for apparel, gifts, and related items brings in major revenue for colleges and their athletic programs. The University of Florida, like all members of the NCAA and other university organizations, has trademark licensing procedures that require strict adherence to University trademark standards.  Similarly, the NCAA has its own trademark protection program to enforce its roster of university sporting events trademarks, such as March Madness®, Final Four®, and others.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of James Hastings James Hastings

James Hastings is an attorney with the U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Practice Group of Practus, LLP.  He is a certified mediator of the INTA Panel of Mediators, an international roster of select professionals with expertise in trademark dispute resolution.

James is…

James Hastings is an attorney with the U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Practice Group of Practus, LLP.  He is a certified mediator of the INTA Panel of Mediators, an international roster of select professionals with expertise in trademark dispute resolution.

James is the publisher of Trademark Opposition Lawyer, an online advisory dedicated to helping brand owners understand important issues that arise in proceedings before the U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.  His commentary has been featured on Corporate Counsel, Law.com, LegalZoom,and other digital publications.

He devotes his practice to trademark opposition and trademark cancellation proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.  Over the course of his career, he has represented the interests of numerous national and international brand owners in trademark litigation matters in both the U.S. District Courts and before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Prior to his current affiliation with Practus, LLP, James was in-house counsel to a New England-based catalog retailer, where he was responsible for developing trademark portfolio acquisition, protection, and licensing strategies.  Earlier in his career, he was a partner and associate at intellectual property law firms in New York, where he was engaged in trademark portfolio and intellectual property protection work on behalf of well-known fashion and personal care brands.

James is a member of the New York and Connecticut bars.  He has lectured at University MBA programs and legal education conferences on the issues of trademark protection and e-commerce law.

Past and Present Membership

  • International Trademark Association
  • Association Corporate Counsel
  • National E-tailing and Mail Order Organization of America