Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`ESTTA828806
`06/22/2017
`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`Filing date:
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Notice of Opposition
`
`Notice is hereby given that the following party opposes registration of the indicated application.
`
`Opposer Information
`
`Name
`
`Entity
`
`Address
`
`Attorney informa-
`tion
`
`Raven Protection Services Inc
`
`Corporation
`
`Citizenship
`
`United Sates
`
`4786 W Commercial Blvd
`Tamarac, FL 33319
`UNITED STATES
`
`DIVYA KHULLAR
`4786 W Commercial Blvd
`Tamarac, FL 33319
`UNITED STATES
`Email: notices@khullarlaw.com, dkhullar@usapatents.com, fabi-
`an@usapatents.com
`Phone: 954-642-2308
`
`Applicant Information
`
`Application No
`
`86925886
`
`Publication date
`
`06/13/2017
`
`Opposition Filing
`Date
`
`Applicant
`
`06/22/2017
`
`Opposition Peri-
`od Ends
`
`07/13/2017
`
`Blue Raven, Inc.
`101 Skyhill Road, Apt. 304
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`UNITED STATES
`
`Goods/Services Affected by Opposition
`
`Class 045. First Use: 2015/12/03 First Use In Commerce: 2015/12/31
`All goods and services in the class are opposed, namely: Personal security consultation; Security
`services for individuals and business persons traveling internationally and domestically, namely,
`providing foreign country security briefings, embassy information for security purposes and securi-
`tyreports; Security threat analysis for personal protection purposes; Providing information in the field
`of personal physical security; Surveillance services
`
`Grounds for Opposition
`
`Priority and likelihood of confusion
`
`Trademark Act Section 2(d)
`
`Mark Cited by Opposer as Basis for Opposition
`
`U.S. Application
`No.
`
`87497317
`
`Application Date
`
`Registration Date
`
`NONE
`
`Word Mark
`
`NONE
`
`Foreign Priority
`Date
`
`NONE
`
`

`

`Design Mark
`
`Description of
`Mark
`
`Goods/Services
`
`NONE
`
`Attachments
`
`Notice of Oposition - Raven.pdf(367164 bytes )
`
`Signature
`
`/Divya Khullar/
`
`Name
`
`Date
`
`DIVYA KHULLAR
`
`06/22/2017
`
`

`

`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Opposition No.
`Serial No. 86/888,084
`Mark: BLUE RAVEN
`Filing Date: March 02, 2016
`Publication Date: June 13, 2017
`
`
`
`RAVEN PROTECTION SERVICES INC, )
`PETITIONER, )
` )
` )
`v. )
` )
` )
`BLUE RAVEN INC., )
`RESPONDENT )
`___________________________________/
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §2.101, RAVEN PROTECTION SERVICES INC., a Floridian company
`
`NOTICE OF OPPOSITION
`
`duly organized and existing under the laws of Florida, with a principal place of business 4772 W
`
`Commercial BLVD, Tamarac Florida 33319 (hereinafter “Petitioner”), believes that it will be
`
`damaged by the registration of the Mark Blue Raven in International Class 45, which is the
`
`subject of U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 86/925,886, filed by BLUE RAVEN INC., a
`
`corporation existing under the laws of the State of Virginia, with a principal place of business at
`
`101 Skyhill Rd Apt 304, Alexandria Virginia 22314, United States (“Applicant”), on March 02,
`
`2016 and hereby opposes the same.
`
`As grounds for this opposition, Petitioner alleges the following:
`
`1. Upon information and belief, Respondent filed to register the Mark “BLUE RAVEN”
`
`(“Respondent’s Mark”), assigned Application Serial No. 86/925,886, with the United States
`
`Patent and Trademark Office on March 02, 2016, for use in connection with International Class
`
`45 services, namely, “Personal security consultation; Security services for individuals and
`
`business persons traveling internationally and domestically, namely, providing foreign country
`
`security briefings, embassy information for security purposes and security reports; Security
`
`

`

`threat analysis for personal protection purposes; Providing information in the field of personal
`
`physical security; Surveillance services” (the “Respondent’s Application”).
`
`2. Upon information and belief, the Respondent’s Application was published for opposition
`
`in the Official Gazette on June 13, 2017.
`
`3. Petitioner timely filed a Section 44(d) application accorded U.S. Serial No. 87497317, for
`
`the Mark “RAVEN” on June 20, 2017 for services in International Class 45, namely, “Security
`
`guard services; Security guarding for facilities; Home security monitoring using cameras;
`
`Monitoring home security alarms; Personal security consultation; Providing security
`
`surveillance of premises for others” (hereinafter “Petitioner’s Application”).
`
`4. Petitioner’s Application is based on its first use in commerce on Nov 01, 2015; which is
`
`prior to the priority date of the Respondent’s application of December 03, 2015.
`
`5. The basis of this opposition is the likelihood of confusion that exists between
`
`Respondent’s and Petitioner’s Marks. Both Respondent’s and Petitioner’s Marks include the
`
`word element “RAVEN,” and as such are virtually identical to one another. The only
`
`differentiating factor between the Marks is that Respondent’s Mark has the name “BLUE” before
`
`the word RAVEN.
`
`6. The likelihood of confusion stems from the fact that Petitioner’s Mark incorporates
`
`Respondent’s mark in its entirety. Furthermore, the dominant feature of Respondent’s Mark is
`
`the term “RAVEN”. Respondent’s BLUE RAVEN Mark is virtually identical to Petitioner’s
`
`RAVEN Mark in sight, sound, meaning and commercial impression.
`
`7. The addition of the name “BLUE”, does little to diminish the likelihood of confusion that
`
`exists from the similarity of the word elements RAVEN, in the Respondent’s and Petitioner’s
`
`

`

`Marks, respectively. This is primarily because the word element “BLUE” is a color and does
`
`little when placed before “RAVEN” making it the irrelevant part of the standard characters.
`
`8. The similarity between the two marks creates a high likelihood of confusion, thus
`
`consumers with a general recollection of Petitioner’s mark will confuse the respondent’s mark as
`
`emanating from the same source.
`
`9. Respondent’s Mark is used in connection with identical services as those outlined in
`
`Petitioner’s Application. It is indisputable that the essence of both Respondent’s and Petitioner’s
`
`services, in International Class 45, is security.
`
`10. The likelihood of confusion is amplified by the fact that the services in Respondent’s
`
`Application are within the natural zone of expansion of the services enumerated in Petitioner’s
`
`Application.
`
`11. Certainly, it is reasonable to assume that Petitioner will expand use of its Mark in
`
`commerce from, inter alia, “Security guard services; Security guarding for facilities; Home
`
`security monitoring using cameras; Monitoring home security alarms; Personal security
`
`consultation; Providing security surveillance of premises for others” into the similar services
`
`described in Respondent’s application.
`
`12. Petitioner submits that it would be unjust if Respondent’s Application were to issue to
`
`registration, as it would enable Respondent to raise questions as to Petitioner’s use of Petitioner’s
`
`Mark, as well as give the Respondent a prima facie exclusive right to use Respondent’s Mark in
`
`connection with its enumerated International Class 45 services, despite Petitioner having priority.
`
`13. Respondent’s use of the BLUE RAVEN Mark is likely to cause confusion, mistake or
`
`deception with consequent injury to Petitioner and the public. Such use and registration of
`
`Respondent’s Mark is likely to cause consumers to mistakenly believe that Respondent’s
`
`

`

`services emanate from Petitioner or that Respondent is in some way associated or connected to
`
`Petitioner when, in fact, no such relationship exists.
`
`14. Registration should be refused pursuant to Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act of 1946, as
`
`amended, 15 U.S.C. §1052(d), on the grounds that Respondent’s Mark so resembles Petitioner’s
`
`Mark as to cause confusion, mistake and/or deception, all to the damage of Petitioner.
`
`15. Based on the foregoing, Petitioner will be damaged by Respondent’s use of the Mark if
`
`the Application is permitted to proceed to registration.
`
`WHEREFORE, Petitioner, by its undersigned counsel of record, respectfully requests
`
`Application Serial No. 86/925,886 be refused and that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
`
`grant any and all further relief to Petitioner that the Board finds necessary and just under the
`
`circumstances.
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Divya Khullar, hereby certify that a true and complete copy of the Notice of Opposition was
`
`electronically filed with the TTAB using the ESTTA system, and served on the Respondent, BLUE
`
`RAVEN INC by electronic email to their counsel Robert Miller at rmiller@lawfirmvirginia.com.
`
`
`Dated: June 22, 2017
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`
`
`
`____s/DIVYA KHULLAR/____
`Divya Khullar
`Reg. No.:69428
`USAPatents.com
`4786 West Commercial Blvd.
`Tamarac, Florida – 33319
`PH: 954-642-2308
`FAX: 754-999-7057
`DKhullar@USAPatents.com
`
`